Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2007 


http://archive.org/details/briefinstitutesoOOandriala 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

IRVINE 


GIFT  OF 

William  C.   Tesche 


BRIEF    INSTITUTES 


OF 


GENERAL    HISTORY 


Being  a  Companion  Volume  to  the  Author's  '  Brief  Insti- 
tutes of  our  Constitutional  History 
English  and  American' 


BY 
E.V  BENJAMIN  ^ANDREWS  D.D.   LL.D. 

President  -of~Brown  University 


jFtftij  lEtittton 


BOSTON 

SILVER,   BURDETT  &  COMPANY 

1894 


p 

AH 


Copyright,  1887 
By  E.  Benjamin  Andrews 


Typography  by  J.  S.  Cushing  &  Co.,  Boston. 
Presswork  by  Berwick  &  Smith,  Boston. 


DEDICATED  TO 

FRIEDRICH  JODL    Dr.  Phil. 

Professor  in  the  University  of  Pracr, 

By  his  friend 

THE  AUTHOR 


KpciTTov  yap  ttov  (TfXLKpbv  ev  rj  vo\v  firj  iKavws  7rcpavai. 

Plato,  Theaetetus,  c.  31. 


NOTE   TO   THE   SECOND   EDITION 


°X*Jc 


This  new  edition  of  the  Institutes  is  precisely  the  same 
as  the  first  except  that  in  it  a  number  of  errors  have  been 
corrected.  The  author  cannot  sufficiently  thank  the  many 
learned  gentlemen  who  have  used  or  examined  the  book, 
for  the  favorable  manner  in  which  they  have  mentioned  it. 
He  is  especially  indebted  to  Dr.  Edward  G.  Bourne,  of 
Yale  University,  for  valuable  information,  enabling  him  to 
make  more  accurate  statements  at  several  important  points. 

May  is,  1888. 


PREFACE 


In  historical  as  in  other  instruction  nothing  can  supply  the  place 
of  the  living  teacher,  but  the  teacher  may  have  helps,  and  a  prime 
one  of  these  this  book  aspires  to  be.  With  such  an  aim  it  has  been 
made  synthetic  in  method,  articulate,  progressive,  unitary.  It  forms 
a  precipitate  rather  than  an  outline,  being  to  history  at  large  what 
the  spinal  cord  is  to  the  nervous  system  or  the  Gulf  Stream  to  the 
Atlantic.  All  unimportant  details  it  ignores,  treats  the  most  im- 
portant in  notes,  and  studiously  renders  prominent  the  rationale  of 
historical  movement.  The  work  does  not  offer  matter  for  rote  reci- 
tation in  the  old  fashion,  but  blazes  through  the  jungle  of  the  ages  a 
course  along  which  the  instructor  can  guide  his  class  much  as  he 
lists.  It  may  serve  as  a  mere  volume  for  reference,  as  a  companion 
and  resume  to  independent  lectures,  or  as  the  basis  of  comments 
from  topic  to  topic.  A  special  feature  of  the  plan  it  embodies  is  the 
encouragement  and  facilitation  of  collateral  reading.  At  the  head 
of  every  Chapter  and  of  nearly  every  paragraph  are  named,  among 
many,  a  number  of  Histories  which  can  be  consulted  in  any  well 
appointed  library,  the  paragraph-headings  commonly  aiding  readiest 
reference  by  citing  chapter,  section  or  page.  Students  so  unfortu- 
nate as  to  be  cut  off  from  side-lights  of  this  character  will  find  valu- 
able illumination  upon  each  Chapter  in  the  corresponding  portion  of 
Fisher's  Outlines.  While  the  eleven  Chapters  constitute  a  compact, 
orderly  and  rounded  whole,  less  advanced  pupils  may  omit  the  First, 
those  well  versed  in  classical  times  the  Third.  General,  though  not 
the  finest,  unity  will  be  preserved  if  a  beginning  be  made  with  the 
Fourth.  Of  the  later  the  Seventh  can  be  passed  with  the  least  loss. 
Far  better  than  sheer  omission  is  the  discussion  of  an  entire  Chapter 
in  one  or  two  exercises,  pupils,  with  this  in  view,  preparing  each  an 
abstract  of  its  salient  points.     As  the  course  can  be  abridged,  so  it 


VI  PREFACE 

can  be  indefinitely  elongated  and  enriched  by  devoting  hours  to 
essays,  abstracts  or  special  studies  upon  peculiarly  weighty  by-topics. 
In  connection  with  many  of  these  ample  literature  is  for  this  very 
purpose  listed  in  notes.  Although  primarily  designed  for  the  class- 
room, the  Institutes  will,  it  is  hoped,  be  found  also  the  best  sort  of 
a  manual  for  general  readers  in  history.  They  are  preeminently 
adapted  to  aid  university  students  engaged  in  special  historical  in- 
vestigation yet  wishing  fuller  grasp  upon  the  main  course  of  human 
events.  The  bibliographies  are  believed  to  contain  most  of  the 
available  gold.  Some  less  precious  metal  is  indeed  added,  but,  we 
trust,  exceedingly  little  pinchbeck.  Should  it  at  first  strike  any 
reader  that  we  have  rendered  Louis  XIV  and  Frederic  the  Great 
insufficiently  conspicuous,  let  him  reflect  that  those  monarchs  were 
after  all  not  prominent  epoch-makers  in  the  actual  causal  order  of 
history.  English  events,  except  where  vitally  affecting  continental, 
have  been  purposely  disregarded,  because  English  history  logically 
ought  to  be,  as  in  America  it  usually  is,  taught  by  itself.  In  con- 
sulting Histories  in  the  preparation  of  these  pages  the  author  has 
sought  those  acknowledged  to  be  of  the  highest  ability  and  trust- 
worthiness. He  of  course  does  not  pretend  to  have  composed  from 
the  sources  in  the  strict  sense  of  that  phrase,  but  he  has,  so  to  speak, 
steadied  himself  upon  these  all  the  way,  and  has  taken  special  re- 
course to  them  in  most  cases  of  dissidence  in  the  views  of  recog- 
nized secondary  authorities.  That  he  has  nowhere  interpreted  ill, 
nowhere  distorted  the  true  perspective,  he  dares  not  hope,  but  prays 
critics  to  remember  the  bulk  of  the  material  which  he  has  had  to 
canvass,  and  the  extraordinary  difficulties  attending  such  maximum 
in  minimo  presentation.  He  will  be  grateful  for  all  criticisms,  and 
particularly  solicits  notification  of  any  out-and-out  errors  which  may 
be  met  with. 

WlLBRAHAM,    MASS., 

August  4,  1887. 


CONTENTS 


PAGES 

Preface  v 

Table  of  Contents vii 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  I xii 

CHAPTER  I 

HISTORY  AND  THE  STUDY  OF  HISTORY.  The  Word  History- 
History  Objective  —  History  Subjective  —  Civilization  —  Historical 
Method—  Method  for  the  Data—  For  Investigation  —  For  Histori- 
cal Exposition  —  Is  History  a  Science  ?  —  Objections  —  Another 
Objection  — The  Chief  Objection  —  Thoughts  toward  a  Different 
View  — History  a  Science  —  Closer  Conception  —  Positivist  Notion 
of  History  —  Is  there  a  Philosophy  of  History  ?  —  Agnosticism  — 
Our  Conclusion  —  Bearings  of  this  Conception  of  History  —  Value 
of  Historical  Study  —  Mode  of  Work  — The  Partition  of  History  .  1-23 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  II 24 

CHAPTER  II 

THE  OLD  EAST.  Juventus  Mundi  -  The  Oldest  History  -  Its  Bear- 
ers —  Eastward  the  Course  of  Empire  —  Diversity  and  Unity  — 
Egypt  — The  Old  Kingdom  — The  New  Kingdom  —  Assyria  and 
Babylon  —  India  —  Government  —  Intelligence  —  Writing  —  Art  — 
Industrial  Condition  —  Religion  —  The  Mosaic  Faith  —  Morality  — 
Contribution  to  the  West 25-60 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  III 62 

CHAPTER  III 

THE  CLASSICAL  PERIOD.  Character  of  Classical  Culture  —  Greece : 
Exaltation  of  Mind  —  Organized  Intelligence  —  Philosophy  —  Art  — 
Political  Ideas  —  Propagation  of  these  Elements  —  Rome :  Genius 


CONTENTS 

PAGES 

and  Place  in  History  —  Political  Universality  and  Absolutism  — 
The  Latin  Language  —  Roman  Law  —  Stoicism  —  The  Municipium 

—  The  Imperial  Organization  —  Rise  of  Christianity  —  Its  Influence 

—  Early  Church  Organization  —  Rise  of  the  Papacy —Theological 
Controversy  —  Other  Influence  of  the  Church         .        .        .        63-96 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  IV 98 

CHAPTER  IV 

THE  DISSOLUTION  OF  ROME.  Signification  and  Significance- 
Moral  Decadence— The  Influence  of  the  Church  — Death  of  the 
Military  Spirit  —  Poverty  —  Occult  Influences  —  Lack  of  Unity  — 
The  Primitive  Germans  —  Their  Culture  —  Their  Constitution  — 
Their  Military  System  —  Their  Religion  —  The  Mixture  —  Disparity 
and  Conflict  —  Constitutional  Results  —  The  Culmination  —  The 
Beginnings  of  France  —  Rise  of  the  Carolingian  House  —  Breach 
of  West  with  East  — Papal  Alliance  with  the  Franks     .        .       99-133 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  V 134 

CHAPTER  V 

THE  MEDI/EVAL  ROMAN  EMPIRE  OF  THE  WEST.  The  Ecclesi- 
astical Unity  of  Europe  —  Carolus  Imperator  —  His  Government  — 
His  Relations  with  the  Church  —  His  Aid  to  Culture  and  Letters 

—  The  Empire  after  Karl  — Otho  the  Great  — The  Empire  and  the 
German  Kingdom  —  The  Extent  of  the  Empire  —  The  Dukes  — 
The  Counts  —  Empire  and  Church  —  Gregory  Hildebrand  — The 
Church  and  Feudalism— To  Canossa  — The  Concordat  of  Worms, 
1 1 22  —  Guelph  and  Ghibelline  —  Frederic  I  —  Frederic  II  —  Fall 

of  the  Hohenstaufen 135—173 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  VI 174 

CHAPTER  VI 

FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH   MONARCHY.     Feudalism  defined 

—  Its  Modifications  —  Its  Causes  —  Common  Theory  of  Origin  — 
Roth's  View  — Waitz's  — Tenures  of  Land  —  Society  —  Feudalism 
Victorious  —  Capetian  Reaction  —  Feudalism  how  far  a  System  — 


CONTENTS 

PAGES 

Defects  and  Merits  —  German  Feudalism  —  Italian  —  English  — 
Communes  and  the  Third  Estate  —  Suger  and  Philip  Augustus  — 
Saint  Louis  —  Philip  the  Fair  —  Monarchy  Supreme       .        .      175-214 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  VII 216 

CHAPTER  VII 

ISLAM  AND  THE  CRUSADES.  Arabia  before  Mohammed -Mo- 
hammed —  His  Doctrine  —  Mohammedan  Conquest  —  The  Causes 
—  Spain  and  France  —  The  East  —  The  Civilization  of  Islam  —  Its 
Decline  —  Jerusalem  —  The  Crusades :  Occasion  and  Meaning  — 
The  First  Crusade  —  The  Second  and  Third  —  The  Fourth  —  The 
Remaining  Eastern  Crusades  —  The  Crusades  in  the  West  —  Re- 
sults of  the  Crusades :  Intellectual  and  Social  —  Ecclesiastical  — 
Political  —  The  Same 217-255 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  VIII 256 

CHAPTER  VIII 

RENAISSANCE  AND  REFORMATION.  Genius  of  the  Renaissance - 
Its  Antecedents  —  Its  Dawn  —  Dante,  Petrarch,  Boccaccio  —  Flor- 
ence —  Dark  Side  of  the  Renaissance  —  Renaissance  Literature  — 
Art  —  Architecture  and  Sculpture  —  Painting  —  The  Renaissance 
European— The  Renaissance  beyond  Italy  — The  New  Ideas  — 
Condition  of  the  Church  —  Reformers  before  the  Reformation  — 
Germany :  Religious  State  —  Political  State  —  Spread  of  the  Ref- 
ormation —  Political  Intervention  and  Settlement  —  Ecclesiastical 
Settlement 257-300 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  IX 302 

CHAPTER  IX 

THE  THIRTY  YEARS'  WAR.  General  Cause  and  Character  -  The 
Augsburg  Settlement  —  The  Difficulty  Aggravated—  111  Success  of 
Protestantism  —  Special  Motives  for  Intervention  —  Union  and 
League  —  Contest  for  Julich-Cleve  —  Bohemia's  Royal  Charter  — 
War  Begun  :  Periods  — Attitude  of  Europe  —  Bohemian  Phase  — 
Palatinate  Phase  —  Danish  Phase :  Waldstein  —  Waldstein's  Pol- 


CONTENTS 

PACES 

icy  — Gustavus  Adolphus  — The  Swedish  Phases  — The  Peace  of 
Westphalia  —  Germany  after  the  Peace  —  Political  Outcome  for 
France  —  Religious  Outcome 303-344 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  X 346 

CHAPTER  X 

THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION.  The  Newest  Political  History - 
Importance  of  the  French  Revolution  —  Monarchy  —  Nobility  — 
Clergy  —  The  Third  Estate  —  Economics  —  Thought  —  Approach 
of  Crisis  —  States-General  and  Constituent  Assembly  —  Revolution 
Begun  — The  Constitution—  Political  Grouping— Political  Forces 
and  Currents  —  March  of  the  Republic  —  King  and  Emigrants  — 
Europe  and  the  Republic  —  The  Rise  of  Napoleon  —  His  Down- 
fall —  Results 347-393 

Bibliography  to  Chapter  XI 394 

CHAPTER  XI 

PRUSSIA  AND  THE  NEW  EMPIRE.  Prussia  in  German  History- 
Old  Brandenburg  —  Its  Rise  to  Statehood  —  The  Great  Elector  — 
The  First  Two  Kings  —  Frederic  the  Great  —  Napoleon's  Heel  — 
Resurrection  —  The  Continental  Gerrymander  of  1815  —  Metter- 
nichismus  —  1830  — The  Mirage  of  '48  —  Sequel  —  Prussia's  last 
Genuflection  —  A  Spinal  Column  —  Crash  of  the  Old  Bund  —  Birth 
of  a  New  —  From  Bund  to  Empire  —  De  Bello  Gallico  —  New  Ger- 
many and  New  Europe 39S_44<J 


SELECT   BIBLIOGRAPHY  TO   CHAPTER   I 

Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,**  B.  VII  [trans.,  Scribner  and  Welford].  Flint, 
Philos.  of  H.  in  France  and  Germany.*  Shedd,  Lect.  on  the  Philos.  of  H. 
Freeman,  Hist'l  Essays,  I  Ser.,  i;  Methods  of  Hist'l  Study.**  Stubbs, 
Mediaeval  and  Modern  H.,**  i-v.  Froude,  Short  Studies,  I  Ser.,  i,  II  Ser., 
at  end.  Buckle,  H.  of  Civilization  in  Eng.*  Bisset,  Essays  on  Hist'l 
Truth.*  Bunsen,  God  in  H.  Smith  [Goldvvin],  On  the  Study  of  H. 
Atkinson,  H.  and  the  Study  of  H.  Ranke,  Universal  H.,*  I.  Kings- 
ley  [in  Roman  and  Teuton],  Limits  of  Exact  Science  as  app.  to  H. 
Adam,  Theories  of  H.**  Morison, '  History '  [in  Encyc.  Brit.].  Lewis 
[Sir  G.  C],  Credibility  of  Early  Roman  H.  Hegel,  Phil,  of  H.*  [Bohn]. 
Schlegel,  do.  [also  in  Bohn].  Augustine,  City  of  God.  Spencer,  Study 
of  Sociology.  Draper,  H.  of  the  Intell.  Develop't  of  Europe.  Arnold, 
Introd.  Lect.  on  Mod.  H.  Thornton  [in  Old-fashioned  Ethics,  etc.],  His- 
tory's Scientific  Pretensions.  Comte,  Pos.  Philos.,  B.  VI.  Mill,  Logic,* 
B.  VI.  Voltaire, '  Hisloire,'  in  Diet,  philos.,  CEttvres,  vol.  41.  Droysen, 
Grundriss  der  Historik**  [last  ed.,  1882].  Rhomberg,  Erhebung  d. 
Gesch.  zum  Range  finer  Wissenschaft*  [1883].  Rocholl,  Philosophie 
d.  Gesch*  [1878].  Lorenz,  Geschichtswissenschafi**  u.s.iv.  [Berlin, 
1886].  Maurenbrecher,  Ueber  die  Aufgabe  d.  historischen  Forschung. 
Gervinus,  Grundziige  d.  Historik.  Floto,  Ueber  historische  Kritik. 
Rumelin,  Reden  u.  Aufsdtze*  I  Ser.,  R.  i;  II  Ser.,  R.  v.  Herder,  Ideen 
zur  Philosophie  d.  Gesch.  d.  Menschheil.  v.  Humboldt  [W.],  Die  Auf- 
gabe des  Geschichtschreibers*  [Abhandlungen  d.  Berl.  Akademie,  l820-'i]. 
Bernheim,  Methodik  der  Geschichtsforschung  [1880].  Ranke,  zur  Krit. 
neuerer  Geschichtschreiber*  [1824.  Werke,  Bd.  34].  Michelet,  System 
der  Phil,  als  exacter  Wissenschaft,  Theil  iv.  Bossuet,  Discours  sur  I'hist. 
universelle.  Montesquieu,  Esprit  des  lois.  Prevost-Paradol,  Essai 
sur  I'hist.  universelle  [1875].  Sismondi,  Hist,  de  la  chute  de  I'empire 
romain  [ch.  i  is  on  the  nature  of  h.].  Odysse-Barot,  Philos.  de  I'hist. 
Laurent,  E\tudes  sur  I'hist.  de  I'humanite**  [18  vols.,  results  seen  in 
last].  Vico,  Principi  di  una  scienza  nuova  [vol.  iv  of  Ferrari's  ed.  of 
Wks.  Milano,  1836.  On  Vico's  views,  Flint's  'Vico,'  in  Philosophical 
Classics  Series,  Edinb.,  1884]. 

*  denotes  special,  **  preeminent  serviceableness.    So  in  all  the  following  bibliographies. 


CHAPTER    I 

HISTORY    AND    THE    STUDY    OF    HISTORY 


§  i     The  Word  History 

Rocholl,  Einleitung. 

The  term  history  has  both  an  objective  and  a  sub- 
jective signification,  —  events  in  themselves,  and  man's 
apprehension  of  events.  The  distinction  is  important.1 
This  application  of  'objective'  and  'subjective'  must 
not  be  confused  with  the  other,  of  correctness  and  arbi- 
trariness in  alleged  historical  results. 

1  Yet  except  Rocholl  no  writer  to  our  knowledge  mentions  it.  It  is 
history  in  its  objective  sense  which  Lotze  discusses  in  Mikrokosmus,  VII, 
while  history  subjective  is  Bacon's  theme  in  de  augmentis.  Droysen,  His- 
torik,  uses  the  term  in  both  senses,  as  indeed  is  very  common,  the  best 
writers  passing  from  one  to  the  other  apparently  without  noticing  the 
change. 

§  2     History  Objective 

Arnold,  Inaugural  Lect.    Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,  VII. 

History  spans  but  a  brief  portion  of  the  past.  To 
brute  existence  succeeds  human,  at  first  little  reflective, 
determined  mostly  from  without.  Thought,  inventive- 
ness, migration,  bring  diversity,  which  becomes,  like 
self-consciousness,  a  main  trait  of  our  species.  It  re- 
lates to  both  place  and  time.    Races  and  peoples  result. 


2  HISTORY 

Civilization  has  its  centres ;  these  shift  unceasingly, 
now  eastward,  now  westward;  and  crises  occur  at  which 
the  advance  of  thousands  of  years  is  lost.  Ruling  ideas 
change,  the  form  of  culture  being  successively  Egyptian, 
Asiatic,  Greek,  Roman,  Teutonic.  Cities,  empires,  rise, 
fall.  Conquerors  sweep  through  the  earth,  subdue  all, 
then  lose  all,  and  are  perhaps  themselves  forgotten. 
Meantime  no  chaos :  causality  is  pervasive,  and  ages 
together  show  progress,  however  general  and  slow. 
Such  is  history  in  se.1 

1  Of  course  even  history  objective  is  history  conceived,  hence  not  out 
of  relatijn  to  our  apprehension.  So  in  any  field  we  can  think  of  the  data 
of  a  science  before,  or  separate  from,  the  existence  of  the  science. 

§  3     History  Subjective 

Arnold,  as  at  §  2.     Weber,  Weltgeschichte,  I,  12.    Rawlinson,  Manual.    Flint, 
Philosophy  of  Hist.,  583  sqq. 

An  a  posteriori  and  tentative  definition  of  history  sub- 
jective would  make  it  the  orderly  knowledge  of  things 
in  time,  as  Physics,  in  the  large  sense,  is  the  knowledge 
of  things  in  space.  A  closer  definition,  still  revealing 
no  inner  law,  results  from  the  further  restriction  of  his- 
tory to  (1)  man,  (2)  his  earthly  career,  (3)  ages  and  local- 
ities marked  by  some  degree  of  self-consciousness  on 
his  part,1  (4)  his  life  in  society,2  (5)  comparatively  main 
events  in  the  thus  determined  compass,  (6)  these  events 
in  their  genetic  and  causal  relations. 

1  Subjective  history  manifestly  cannot  antedate  objective.  This,  Schlei- 
cher begins  with  speech.  Hegel  denies  history  in  the  true  sense  to  India 
and  China  and  makes  it  commence  with  Persia,  the  first  empire  that  passed 
away.  Curtius  agrees  with  Hegel  as  to  Egypt.  Sismondi  says :  '  History 
only  arises  with  civilization.    So  long  as  man  struggles  with  physical  needs 


STUDY    OF    HISTORY  3 

he  concentrates  all  his  attention  upon  the  present.     He  has  no  past,  no 
memories,  no  history.' 

2  Mommsen:  'The  doings  and  dealings,  the  thoughts  and  imaginings, 
of  the  individual,  however  strongly  they  may  refk-ct  the  characteristics  of 
the  national  mind,  form  no  part  of  history.'  Cf.  Arnold,  Inaugural  Lec- 
ture, where  he  points  out  that  history  arises  only  when  a  considerable 
group  of  men  unite  in  a  common  interest.  La  psychologie  n1  envisage 
que  I'individu,  et  elle  V envisage  d'une  maniere  abstraite,  absolue,  comme 
un  snjet  permanent  et  toujours  identique  a  lui-meme  ;  aux  yeux  de  la 
critique,  la  conscience  se  fait  dans  Phumanite  comme  dans  I'individu  ;  elle 
a  son  histoire.  Le  grand  progres  de  la  critique  a  ete  de  subslituer  la  cate- 
gorie  du  devenir  a  la  categoric  de  Vetre,  la  conception  du  relatif  a  la  con- 
ception de  Vabsolu,  le  mouvement  a  Vimmobilite.  Renan,  Averroes  el 
Vaverroisme. 

§  4     Civilization 

Goldwin  Smith,  Study  of  Hist.  Flint,  Introduction.  Lecky,  Hist,  of  European 
Morals,  I.  Fiske,  Destiny  of  Man,  chaps,  xi,  xii,  xiii.  Guizot,  Civilization  in 
Europe,  Lect.  I. 

A  conception  auxiliary  to  that  of  history,  derived  from 
certain  of  the  above  elements,  is  civilization.1  A  nation 
is  regarded  civilized  in  proportion  as  therein,  at  once  and 
harmoniously,  (i)  morality  is  widespread  and  rational, 
(2)  the  same  is  true  of  religion,  (3)  intelligence  prevails, 
both  intensive  and  extensive,  (4)  social  organization  is 
complete,  (5)  the  means  of  wealth  are  abundant  and  well 
distributed,  (6)  government  asserts  itself  to  the  point  of 
highest  helpfulness  to  general,  without  hindering  indi- 
vidual, development,  (7)  art  is  cultivated,  refinement  and 
taste  general,  (8)  in  all  these  respects  society  occupies 
an  attitude  of  progress.2 

1  Honegger,  Kulturgeschichte,  I,  §  I,  complains  with  cause  of  the 
little  which  has  been  accomplished  toward  a  definition  of  civilization 
{Kultur).  Guizot  reduces  it  to  progressive  melioration  in  the  condition 
of  both  society  and  the  individual.  W.  von  Humboldt,  Ueber  die  Kawi- 
sprache,  etc.,  I,  distinguishes  civilization  as  relatively  external,  from  Kultur 


4  HISTORY 

and  Bildung,  more  internal,  almost  as  if  that  could  be  perfect  without  these. 
Seebohm,  Reformation,  5,  makes  it  a  political  conception:  'the  art  of 
living  together  in  civil  society.'     Cf.  §  15,  n.  1. 

2  On  the  idea  of  progress,  and  the  various  forms  it  has  assumed  in  con- 
temporary science,  Caro,  in  Revue  des  deux  Mondes,  15  Oct.,  1873.  <Jf. 
§i7»«-3- 

§  5     Historical  Method 

Froude,  Short  Studies,  II  ser.,  at  end.    Freeman,  Methods.    Droysen,  Historik. 
Rhomberg,  Erhebung. 

Logically  first  among  the  many  important  problems 
which  inhere  in  the  conceptions  presented  by  the  above 
paragraphs,  is  the  question  how  and  how  far  subjective 
history  can  be  brought  into  agreement  with  objective, 
in  other  words,  how  far  the  knowable  of  man's  past  can 
become  known.  To  answer  this  question  is  the  task  of 
historical  method,  a  science  by  itself.1  Historical,  like 
all  work,  to  be  most  successful,  must  proceed  in  an 
orderly  way.  The  mind  applies  its  categories  to  any 
matter  of  knowledge  only  gradually.  History  in  the 
most  objective  sense  is  not  at  once  data  for  a  science 
of  history,  supposing  such  a  science  possible ;  and  the 
data  for  such  a  science  would  fall  far  short  of  being  the 
completed  science.  The  science  of  historical  method 
discusses  method  for  the  data  and  the  investigation  of 
history,  and  for  the  presentation  of  historical  results.2 

1  Even  those  who  deny  that  there  can  be  a  science  of  history  admit  the 
existence  of  a  science  of  historical  investigation.  Notice,  esp.,  Froude,  as 
above*. 

2  Note  the  logical  order  of  our  matter.  Having  defined  as  it  were 
from  the  outside  both  history  and  civilization,  we  pass  to  examine  the 
science  of  method,  that  science  by  which  alone  historical  truth  can  be 
ascertained.  Upon  learning  what  this  is  able  to  accomplish,  we  are  in 
condition  to  test  the  questions  concerning  history  itself  as  basis  for  science 
and  philosophy. 


study  of  history  5 

§  6    Method  for  the  Data 

Droysen,  Historik,  §§  45  sqq. 

The  aim  of  this  is  so  to  lay  out  the  fields,  classes,  etc., 
of  data  to  be  examined,  and  to  present  such  modes  of 
treating  them,  as  shall  insure  their  most  facile  and  per- 
fect investigation.  Method  here  can,  of  course,  be  more 
or  less  exhaustive.  Thorough  method  would  subject  the 
data  to  both  static  and  dynamic  analysis.  By  the  static, 
the  categories  of  space  and  time  would  first  be  applied. 
Then,  within  any  given  compass  thus  defined,  the  com- 
plex of  historical  material  could  be  so  dissected  as  to 
exhibit  men's  acts  and,  to  some  extent,  their  aims  and 
impulses,  also  such  social  institutions  as  church,  state, 
property,  money,  and  the  like,  as  relatively  isolated  phe- 
nomena. By  the  dynamic,  causal  connections  would 
be  brought  to  view,  the  movement  of  history  descried, 
events  traced  to  their  proximate,  and  as  far  as  possible, 
to  their  ultimate,  causes,  and  the  entire  life  of  man  on 
earth  reduced  to  a  certain  unity.1 

1  The  purpose  of  this  paragraph  is  to  suggest  the  sort  of  plan  which  the 
successful  historical  investigator  must  have  in  mind  before  he  begins  his 
work.  Droysen  has  nearly  the  same  purpose  in  speaking  of:  i  materials, 
a)  pieces  of  nature  stamped  with  man's  impress,  as  inventions,  also  brutes 
domesticated  and  trained,  b)  man's  own  development  into  nations  and 
races,  <r)  social  formations,  </)  political  do.;  i\  forms,  a)  natural  partner- 
ships, as  family,  neighborhood,  tribe,  b)  ideal  do.,  as  speech,  the  arts, 
sciences,  religions,  c~)  practical  do.,  as  government,  justice,  property; 
iii  agents,  which  are  human  beings,  i.e.,  subjects  of  will;  iv  ends,  teleo- 
logical  view  of  history :  all  ends  converging  to  one,  and  this  undiscover- 
able  by  investigation. 


6  HISTORY 

§  7    For  Investigation 

freeman,  Methods.     Droysen,  §§  19  sqq.     Lenormant,  praef.  to  Histoire  anciennt 
de  I' Orient.    Stubbs,  Mediaeval  and  Mod.  Hist.,  i-v  inc. 

Historical  investigation  embraces  three  processes  : 
1  Discovery,  which,  through  questioning,  comparison, 
combination  and  hypothesis,  brings  to  light  sources,1 
viz. :  (a)  remains,  (b)  sources  in  the  narrower  sense, 
(c)  monuments.  2  Criticism,  whose  problem  is  to  de- 
termine the  real  relation  borne  by  these  pieces  of  the 
past  to  the  original  life-scene,  inquires  into  their  {a)  gen- 
uineness, (b)  changes  of  form,  (c)  probativeness  in  rela- 
tion to  their  profession,2  (d)  probativeness  in  relation  to 
the  investigator's  need.  3  Interpretation,  whose  task 
is  truthfully  and  as  completely  as  possible  to  re-create 
from  those  now  understood  pieces  of  the  past  the  origi- 
nal life-scene,  handles  (a)  the  mere  facts  attested  by  the 
evidence,  (b)  their  conditions,  (c)  the  psychological  pro- 
cesses which  were  their  immediate  causes  and  their  im- 
mediate results,  (d)  the  great  thoughts  dominating  these 
processes. 

1  Remains  or  remnants  are  real  pieces  of  the  past  which  -were  never 
intended  as  records  [in  memoriam  rerum\.  They  may  be  things  bearing 
human  stamp,  as  papers,  books,  roads,  aqueducts,  mounds,  or  customs  or 
thoughts  that  have  been  handed  down.  A  language  is  a  remnant.  Sources, 
in  the  specific  sense,  consist  of  histories,  chronicles,  traditions,  and  what- 
ever was  originally  intended  in  memoriam  rerum.  These  sources  may  be 
contemporary  or  secondary.  Monuments  combine  both  the  above  charac- 
ters, being  remnants  which  at  the  same  time  were  intended  to  conserve 
memories  of  persons,  things  or  events.  Such  are  literal  monuments,  like 
the  pyramids,  most  works  of  art,  coins,  medals,  landmarks,  coats  of  arms, 
names,  titles.  —  Droysen.  On  use  of  inscriptions  as  sources,  Hicks,  Manual 
of  Greek  Hist'l  Inscriptions  [Clarendon  Pr.,  1882].  On  making  history  from 
language,  Max  Miiller,  Science  of  Lang.,  235;  Chips,  II,  251 ;   Contemp. 


STUDY    OF    HISTORY  7 

Rev.,  Oct.,  1882.  Also  Mommsen,  Rome,  I,  37  sqq.  The  early  Indo- 
Europeans  had  all  our  domestic  animals  except  the  cat,  but  we  cannot 
prove  them  agricultural  as  we  can  the  Greco- Romans.  They  had  the 
family,  also  gold  and  nearly  all  our  other  metals.  Rawlinson  gives  instead 
of  the  above  tripartite  division  of  sources  a  bipartite,  into  '  records '  and 
'  antiquities.'  Freeman  and  Stubbs  justly  emphasize  the  absolute  indis- 
pensableness  to  truthful  historical  writing  of  acquaintance  with  the  sources. 
Bisset,  Essay  i,  shows  that  criticism  is,  if  possible,  even  more  indispen- 
sable. An  historian,  like  Froude  or  Hume,  may  work  from  the  original 
sources,  yet  construct  fables.  Many  documents  carefully  preserved  as 
authorities  contemporary  with  the  events  they  profess  to  describe  are 
known  to  have  been  composed  to  conceal  instead  of  revealing  the  truth. 

2  Such  questions  as,  What  were  the  author's  opportunities  for  knowing? 
What  his  bias?  What  the  bias  of  his  times?  Was  the  thing  possible  in- 
trinsically? possible  under  the  circumstances?  As  to  myths,  it  will  not  do 
to  trim  off  that  which  is  incredible  and  accept  the  rest.  The  incredible 
may  be  the  most  or  the  only  valuable  part. 


§  8     For  Historical  Exposition 

Rhomberg,  VI.     Droysen,  §§  87  sqq. 

Historical  exposition  must  regard  first  of  all,  truth 
and  perspective,  the  latter  in  the  two  elements  of  times l 
and  proportion.  Further :  1  In  respect  to  its  general 
form,  historical  exposition  may  be  either  analytic  or  syn- 
thetic, and  analytic  exposition  may  either  (a)  follow  the 
course  of  the  original  investigation,  (6)  ask  a  question 
and  test  various  answers,  progressively  approaching  the 
true,  or  (c)  state  a  fact  and  trace  its  several  implications. 
2  Its  subject-matter  may  be  very  various  ;  as  a  life,  the 
operation  of  some  historical  cause  or  congeries  of  them, 
the  career  of  an  institution,  one  or  more,  a  conflict  of 
elements,  the  social  culture 2  of  a  people  or  period.  3 
Its  main  aim  may  be  to  interest,  to  instruct  or  to  dem- 
onstrate.3   4  Its  style  may  be  more  simply  didactic  or 


8  HISTORY 

more  rhetorical.  Fine  style  in  historical  writing  is  not, 
as  is  often  assumed,  incompatible  with  fidelity  to  fact. 
5  According  to  the  degree  and  mode  in  which  he  deals 
with  causes  [dynamics],  the  writer  will  be  a  chronicler, 
a  pragmatist  or  a  philosophic  historian.4 

1  I.e.,  contemporary  events  must  be  so  exhibited,  and  non-contemporary 
so  —  an  important  and  difficult  thing. 

2  Kulturgeschichte  need  not  be  unscientific,  though  too  much  of  it  has 
been,  treating  of  matters  destitute  of  bearing  on  the  progress  of  civilization. 
Hence  its  too  great  unpopularity  with  scientific  historians.  Jodl,  Kultur- 
geschichtschreibung,  Halle,  1878. 

8  Historia  scribitur  ad  narrandum  non  ad  probandum,  says  Quintil- 
ian.  This  was  true  of  Livy  and  most  ancient  historians.  Moderns  care 
more  for  objective  fact  and  for  social  evolution.  Morison,  '  History,'  in 
Encyc.  Brit.,  speaks  of  a  '  rhetorical '  [ancient]  and  a  '  sociological ' 
[modern]  school  of  historical  composition.  He  allies  Macaulay  with  the 
rhetorical.  But  Thucydides  and  Tacitus  are  patterns  of  critical  historical 
writing. 

4  Gervinus,  Grundziige  der  Historik.  On  pragmatism  and  philosophy 
in  history,  Seeley  and  Birrell,  Contemp.  Rev.,  June,  1885.  S.  conceives 
history  as  a  philosophy;  B.,  as  a  pageant.  Cf.  Flint,  Phil,  of  Hist,  in 
France  and  Germany,  222.  True  history  is  no  mere  account  of  '  bare 
fact '  to  the  exclusion  of  construction.  The  meaning,  the  bearing,  of  facts 
is  the  main  thing.  Also  not  every  fact  of  the  past  is  of  import  for  history, 
e.g.,  that  Karl  Great,  according  to  Einhard,  had  bright  eyes.  Had  Einhard 
written  '  blue  eyes,'  as  Luden,  '  for  patriotism's  sake,'  makes  him  read,  it 
would  have  been  the  registry  of  a  significant  historical  fact. 

§  9     Is   History  a  Science  ? 

Kingsley  [in  Roman  and  Teuton],  Limits  of  Exact  Science  as  App.  to  Hist.  Froude, 
Short  Studies,  I,  i.  Goldwin  Smith,  Study  of  Hist.  Mill,  Logic,  B.  VI.  Riimelin, 
Reden  unit  Aufs'dtze,  II,  118  sqq.     Thornton,  Old-fashioned  Ethics,  ii. 

While  no  one  questions  that  history  admits  the  appli- 
cation of  scientific  methods,  and  yields  solid  and  orderly 
knowledge,  including  numberless  instructive  and  useful 
generalizations,  thus  forming  one  of  the  most  important 


STUDY    OF    HISTORY  9 

fields  for  human  study,  its  character  as  science  in  any- 
proper  sense,  has  been  earnestly  denied.  Objectors 
evidently  do  not  merely  mean  either  (i)  that  history  is 
necessarily  an  inexact  science,1  or  (2)  that  it  is,  as  yet, 
imperfectly  developed.2  They  intend  to  assert  that  a 
proper  science  of  history  is  impossible  in  the  nature  of 
the  case.     The  impossibility  is  variously  grounded. 

1  Like  ethics,  e.g. 

2  Like  the  science  of  the  tides  or  of  medicine.  On  tides,  Sir  Wm. 
Thompson  before  the  British  Association,  Aug.  24,  1882. 

§  10     Objections 

See  last  §.     Westmin.  Rev.,  Jan.,  1881. 

The  alleged  impossibility  has  been  based  upon  defect 
or  difficulty  in  man's  means  of  knowledge.  Writers  have 
urged  :  i  That  we  know  past  and  even  contemporary 
events  only  very  uncertainly  and  inadequately.  2  That 
history  being  an  infinite  progress  yet  not  moving  in 
cycles,  must  need  infinite  time  clearly  to  reveal  its  law.1 
There  is  much  weight  to  both  assertions.  Especially 
touching  the  first,  there  are  many  great  historical  events 
as  to  which  the  impossibility  of  arriving  at  the  exact 
truth  is  proverbial.2  But  difficulties  nearly  the  same  in 
kind  with  these  pertain  to  every  science.3 

1  Rocholl:  '  History  shows  us  neither  beginning  nor  end'  (386).  Rii- 
melin :  '  the  laws  of  human  development  will  be  locked  up  to  scientific 
knowledge  still  for  unmeasured  stretches.'  —  Reden  u.  Aitfsatze,  I,  29. 
Roto  was  more  or  less  of  a  pessimist.  Ficker  is  a  virtuoso  in  Diplomatik, 
so  is  Sick  el;  but  they  differ  to  to  ccelo  as  to  the  value  of  certain  sources. 
So  Gaedeke  and  Bresslau  upon  the  Casket  Letters  of  Mary  Stuart. 

2  We  know  naught  of  Hannibal  but  through  his  deadly  foes.  Nor  of 
David  Leslie,  who  fought  the  battle  of  Dunbar  against  Cromwell.     Bisset 


IO  HISTORY 

ably  exhibits  this  difficulty.  See,  esp.,  Essay  i.  Of  Mirabeau's  speech  to 
the  messenger  of  Louis  XVI,  refusing  to  dissolve  the  Constituent  Assem- 
bly, there  are  three  different  versions,  variant  and  in  part  contradictory, 
all  from  ear-witnesses.  —  Ducoudray,  Hist.  Contemporaine,  94.  At  what 
moment,  or  hour,  did  Bliicher  arrive  at  Waterloo  ?  Die  Zeiten  der  Ver- 
gangenluit,  says  Goethe,  sinJ  uns  ein  Buck  mil  sieben  Siegeln.  With 
G.  this  was  no  poetic  fancy  but  a  fixed  conviction.  Of  past  times  and 
peoples  we  have  no  statistics.  But  general  knowledge  is  yet  knowledge, 
within  its  limits  as  valuable  as  any. 

8  We  certainly  get  in  history  no  such  cycles  or  totalities  of  fact  or 
development  as  we  do  in  botany,  e.g.,  where  we  can  mark  the  birth  and 
death  of  plants.  Also,  in  history,  the  field  of  objective  data  is  ever  grow- 
ing, as  well  as  the  perfection  of  our  mental  grasp  upon  the  data.  But  in 
neither  of  these  particulars  is  history  worse  off  than  astronomy.  Least  of 
all  can  a  positivist  urge  objection  (2),  as  to  him  all  sciences  are  in  flux. 
In  a  sense  he  is  right.  In  every  one  data  are  multiplying,  or  at  least  our 
knowledge  of  data  is  increasing.  The  history  of  the  sciences  bids  us 
expect  that  after  a  hundred  years  few  of  them  will  wear  the  same  face  as 
now.  They  are  sciences  notwithstanding.  There  would  be  a  science  of 
botany  if  each  plant  lived  a  million  years. 

§  11     Another  Objection 

Schopenhauer,  Welt  ah  Wille,  etc.,  I,  §  51,  II,  Kap.  38.    Rumelin,  as  at  §  9. 

3  Schopenhauer  and  Rumelin  deny  scientific  charac- 
ter to  history  because  of  what  they  assume  to  be  the 
permanent  and  necessary  relationship  of  its  object-matter 
to  onr  intelligence.  They  judge  that  in  consequence  of 
this  relationship  all  historical  generalizations,  instead  of 
being,  like  those  of  veritable  science,  legislative  for 
instances  and  cases,  are,  at  least  so  far  as  we  can  ever 
know,  more  or  less,  if  not  entirely,  subjective,  related  to 
the  actual  facts  much  as  are  mathematically  calculated 
probabilities.1  But  '  any  facts  are  fitted  in  themselves 
to  be  a  subject  of  science,  which  follow  one  another 
according  to  constant  laws,  although  those  laws  may  not 


STUDY   OF    HISTORY  II 

have  been  discovered  nor  even  be  discoverable  by  our 
existing  resources.'2  These  authors  therefore  only 
prove  history  an  incomplete  or  at  worst  an  inexact 
science. 

1  What  Schopenhauer  says  amounts  only  to  the  truism  that  sense- 
phenomena,  as  such,  are  not  matter  for  thought.  But  —  what  Flint  in 
his  criticism  overlooks  —  the  great  pessimist  largely  corrects  himself  be- 
fore ending  his  discussion,  by  admitting  the  possibility  of  a  /AougAi-grasp 
upon  historic  fact  which  shall  be  truly  objective.  Schopenhauer,  like  Goethe, 
places  history  in  analogy  with  travels,  anecdotes,  etc.,  —  interesting  and  not 
destitute  of  value,  but  nothing  more.  Rumelin  conceives  it  rather  as  Knies 
and  Roscher  regard  political  economy.  Both  seem  to  harbor  the  vicious 
notion  that  there  is  no  science  but  exact  science. 

2  Mill,  Logic,  B.  VI,  iii.  An  imperfect  science  is  one  susceptible  of 
becoming  exact,  but  not  yet  completely  wrought  out;  an  inexact,  one  to 
the  full  construction  of  which  our  present  powers  are  inadequate. 

§  12     The  Chief  Objection 

Froude,  Short  Studies,  I,  i.     Adams,  Manual,  Int.     Schlegel,  Philos.  of  Hist.,  390  sqq. 

4  The  most  serious  objection  of  all,  urged  by  Froude 
with  many  others,  relates  to  the  object-matter  of  his- 
tory. It  is  that,  man's  will  being  free,  human  actions 
always  involve  an  incalculable  element.1  But  (a)  this 
would,  at  most,  only  prove  imperfection  in  the  science,2 
and  (b)  cannot  effect  even  so  much  save  through  the 
inadmissible  conception  of  freedom  as  arbitrariness.3 

1  '  If  it  is  free  to  man  to  choose  what  he  will  do  or  not  do,  there  is  no 
adequate  science  of  him.  If  there  is  a  science  of  him,  there  is  no  free 
choice '  [Froude] .  Yet  Froude,  most  illogically,  shifts  the  ground  of  his 
objection  when  he  adds :  '  If  we  had  the  whole  case  before  us,  .  .  .  some 
such  theory  as  Mr.  Buckle's  might  possibly  turn  out  to  be  true.' 

2  Because  unnumbered  events  which  go  to  make  up  history  are  con- 
fessedly under  law.  Lotze  in  VII,  i,  of  Mikrokosmus,  has  laid  stress  on 
this.  Ibid.,  ii, '  The  irregular  will  of  the  individual  is  always  restricted  in  its 
action  by  universal  conditions  not  subject  to  arbitrary  will.' 


12  HISTORY 

3  Freedom  and  action  under  law  are  not  contradictory  conceptions  as 
Froude  and  Thornton  allege.  Nothing  could  be  more  thoroughly  the  sub- 
ject of  scientific  knowledge  than  the  behavior  of  a  perfectly  rational  being. 
It  is  because  men  are  but  partially  rational  and  free  that  our  limited  intelli- 
gence has  difficulty  in  forecasting  their  deeds.  Even  Lotze's  masterly  dis- 
cussion seems  infected  with  the  confusion  of  free  with  arbitrary  will.  So 
Lenormant  and  Rumelin.  RUmelin  keenly  notices  how  vain  it  is  to  regard 
the  great  masses  of  historic  fact  as  wholly  under  law  unless  each  human 
volition  is  so. 


§  13     Thoughts  toward  a  Different  View 

Mill  as  at  §  g. 

I  The  term  'science'  is  very  inclusive.1  2  A  body 
of  facts  may  constitute  a  science  in  spite  of  large  laauice 
among  them  and  exceeding  perplexities  concerning  them. 
3  The  admitted  applicability  of  scientific  methods  to 
history  argues  a  scientific  character  in  history.  4  The 
application  of  such  methods  in  modern  historical  study 
has  produced  immense  and  invaluable  results.  5  Sev- 
eral commonly  acknowledged  sciences  are  in  a  sense 
embraced  in  history.2 

1  Much  dissidence  of  view  would  instantly  disappear  were  disputants  to 
begin  by  seeking  a  common  definition  of  this  term. 

2  Political  economy,  ethnology,  politics.  Scientific  philology  is  also 
Tery  dependent  on  history.     So  is  scientific  law. 

§  14     History  a  Science 

Mill  as  at  §9.     Comte,  Positive  Philosophy,  VI.    Draper,  \.    Rhombergo&3\\  5. 

Knowledge  becomes  science  in  proportion  to  its  com- 
pleteness.1    Since,  data  being  gathered,  order  or  organi- 
sation is  the  source  of  this  completeness,  knowledge  is 
cience  in  the  degree  in  which  it  can  be  subjected  to 


STUDY    OF    HISTORY  1 3 

method  and  law,  and  so  rendered  comprehensible  and 
certain.  Under  this  test  history  must  surely  be  as- 
signed the  rank  of  a  science,  though  confessedly  inexact 
and  as  yet  but  partially  wrought  out.  As  illustrating 
the  order  traceable  in  the  historical  field,  take  :  i  The 
laws  of  progress  in  general,  and  of  progress  by  rhyth- 
mic contrast  and  opposition.2  2  The  scope  of  predic- 
tion in  history,  often  wrongly  exalted  to  the  place  of 
sole  criterion.3  3  The  possibility  of  referring  historical 
movement  to  certain  springs,  as  (a)  ideas  of  right,4 
(b)  personal  initiative,  (c)  the  spirit  of  an  age  or  period, 
(d)  the  spirit  of  a  people.5 

1  Wissenschaft  is  that  which  schafft  Wissen  ;  i.e.,  Wissen  is  its  result. 
Wissen  is,  to  be  sure,  also  its  cause. 

2  Such  rhythm  Hegel  takes  as  the  law  of  history,  and  the  facts  support 
him  in  a  marvellous  manner.  It  is,  however,  only  a  formal  law,  like  the 
general  law  of  progress.     It  reveals  no  causes. 

8  Comte :  '  Scientific  prevision  of  phenomena  the  test  of  true  science.' 
So  Froude :  '  When  we  talk  of  science  we  mean  something  which  can  fore- 
see as  well  as  explain.'  Cf.  Rocholl,  383  sq.  Account  for  it  as  one  will, 
or  not  at  all,  human  actions  are  subject  to  prophecy  to  a  vastly  greater 
extent  than  is  usually  supposed. 

4  Bisset's  first  essay  proves,  against  Buckle  and  Comte,  that  moral 
forces,  at  least  in  many  great  crises  of  civilization,  have  been  more  decisive 
than  intellectual. 

6  Cf.  also  Comte's  presentation,  in  various  chapters,  of  what  he  terms 
social  dynamics.  Wherever  men  have  advanced  at  all,  it  has  been  by  steps 
and  stages  nearly  the  same  in  the  different  races  and  ages. 

§  15     Closer  Conception 

See  last  §. 

History  may  be  characterized  as  part  of  Anthropology, 
as  the  science  of  humanity  viewed  upon  its  spiritual 
side    and  in  course  of   evolution.     Its   inner  nature  is 


14  HISTORY 

hence  determined  by  that  of  man,  and  mainly  in  four 
particulars,  viz.  :  (i)  as  spiritual  and  social,  (2)  as  sus- 
ceptible to  weal,  (3)  as  moral,  (4)  as  progressive.  By 
synthesis  of  these  points  history  will  be  found  to  secure 
not  only  its  limits  but  also  a  veritable  unity.  Observe  : 
1  That  no  special  history  is  identical  with  history, 
which  latter  is  the  rfciimt  and  end  of  all  special  histo- 
ries.1 2  That  the  greatly  varying  importance  of  special 
histories  is  determined  according  to  the  above  four 
criteria.  3  That  history  can  be  presented  by  single 
writers  or  works,  only  in  pieces. 

1  Freeman,  v.  Treitschke,  and  to  a  great  extent  Arno.  V  unduly  identify 
history  with  political  history;  Augustine,  Bossuet,  ana  Pres.  Edwards, 
with  religious.  Better  Guizot :  history  relates  to  man  '  in  all  the  careers 
where  man's  activity  displays  itself.  There  is  unity  in  the  life  of  a  people 
and  in  the  life  of  the  race  as  in  an  individual  life,  but  as  his  entire  environ- 
ment and  all  the  spheres  of  his  work  combine  to  form  the  character  of  a 
man,  which  is  one  and  identical,  so  there  is  to  the  history  of  a  people  a 
unity  based  upon  the  variety  of  its  entire  existence.'  And  Bacon :  '  Civil 
history  in  general  has  three  special  kinds,  sacred,  civil  and  literary,  the 
last  of  which  being  left  out,  the  history  of  the  world  appears,  like  the 
statue  of  Polyphemus,  without  its  eye,  the  part  that  best  shows  the  life  and 
spirit  of  the  person.'  It  is  easy,  as  Draper  does,  and  perhaps  Guizot,  to 
carry  too  far  the  analogy  between  individual  and  social  life.  Nations  do 
not  seem  to  grow  old  or  decay  from  any  intrinsic  necessity.  See  Lotze, 
Mikrokosmus,  VII,  iii.  Cf.  Renan,  ante,  §  3,  n.  2.  Guizot  notes  well  that 
society  makes  its  political  institutions  instead  of  being  made  by  them,  so 
that  political  history  must  go  out  of  itself  to  know  itself.  Sismondi,  on  the 
contrary,  declares  that  '  government  is  the  first  cause  of  the  character  of 
peoples'  [pref.  to  Italian  Republics], 


study  of  history  1 5 

§  16    Positivist  Notion  of  History 

Fiske,  Cosmic  Philos.,  Pt.  II,  xvii.    Draper,  i.     Buckle,  I. 

If  history  is  thus  justified  in  claiming  scientific  status, 
Comte  and  Buckle  expound  this  status  too  summarily. 
To  them,  history  is  part  of  nature,  amenable  to,  and 
explicable  by,  law,  in  the  same  sense  as  nature  at  large. 
Acknowledging  the,  at  present,  great  imperfection  of 
history,  and  also  the  special  difficulty  here  attending 
investigation  owing  to  the  little  scope  offered  to  experi- 
ment, they  still  expect  such  perfection  of  the  science  as 
will  subject  human  events  to  the  most  accurate  predic- 
tion. The  Positive  Philosophy  has  done  eminent  ser- 
vices to  history,  as  elsewhere,1  but  from  its  point  of 
view,  we  believe,  the  real  genius  of  the  science  cannot 
possibly  be  discovered.  Man,  as  to  what  is  truly  char- 
acteristic of  him,  is  not  a  product  of  nature,  but  of 
spirit ;  and  spirit,  while  not  lawless,  is  subtle,  mysteri- 
ous, deep,  mainly  operating  by  categories  far  more 
refined  and  complex  than  confront  us  in  the  sciences  of 
space  and  time.2 

1  The  great  merit  \>f  positivism  is  to  have  bred  love  of  truth  as  well  as 
a  far  more  patient  study  of  actual  facts  than  once  prevailed.  Not  the 
exact  sciences  alone  are  thus  indebted  to  it,  but  even  theology.  This,  not- 
withstanding the  ludicrous  apriorism  and  blunders  which  Bisset  has  fast- 
ened upon  Comte. 

2  Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,  VII,  i,  iii. 

§  17     Is  there  a  Philosophy  of  History? 

See  references  at  §§  10,  II,  13,  15,  16  and  17.     Adam,  ch.  i. 

This  is  a  different  and  a  far  deeper  question,  though 
nearly  always  confused  with  the  preceding.1     We  agree 


l6  HISTORY 

with  Buckle  that  '  the  actions  of  men  and  th^.reforc  of 
societies '  are  '  governed  by  fixed  laws,' 2  and  are  not 
'  the  resuk  either  of  chance  or  of  [arbitrary]  superhuman 
interference ; '  also  with  the  almost  universal  opinion 
that  history,  taken  as  a  whole,  has  been  a  progress 
materially,  intellectually  and  morally.3  Whence  so 
grand  and  imposing  a  cosmical  order? 

1  The  propriety  of  this  distinction  is  obvious.  Thus  the  positivists, 
strongest  champions  of  a  science  of  history,  in  denying  the  possibility  of 
knowing  ultimate  fact  deny  that  of  a  philosophy  of  history.  See  next  §. 
Ernst  Laas  is  the  only  positivist  who  sees  that  positivism  is  precluded  by 
its  principles  from  making  a  genuine  generalization. 

2  Adam  excellently  shows  that  the  denial  of  chance  is  not  the  denial  of 
an  ultimate  and  supreme  Will.     See  also  Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,  VII,  i. 

3  Many  question  the  certainty  of  the  continuance  of  this.  So  Roscher, 
Riimelin,  and  even  Lotze.  Scepticism  here  proceeds  largely  from  Malthus, 
and  there  is  nothing  successfully  to  oppose  to  it  except  hope  of  the  moral 
amelioration  of  men.  Hard  to  frame  an  entirely  satisfactory  conception 
of  progress.  Cf.  §  4,  n.  2.  Its  best  criterion  is  the  elevation  of  the  stand- 
ard by  which  men  judge  their  own  moral  life.  —  Riimelin.  Progress,  says 
Herder,  lies  in  the  tendency  to  humanity,  in  the  advancing  strength  of 
those  powers  which  exalt  man  above  the  brute,  the  intellectual,  moral,  and 
religious  impulses.  See  also  Froude,  Short  Studies,  II  ser. :  '  On  Progress.' 
Rocholl,  390,  thinks  no  philosophy  of  history  possible  that  is  not  based  on 
grounds  other  than  the  mere  teachings  of  history,  e.g.,  on  faith  or  on 
metaphysics.  Riimelin  maintains  that  although  history  shows  '  no  natural 
laws,  expressing  a  must,  an  infallible  joining  of  discoverable  conditions  and 
results,'  yet '  an  increasing  victory  of  mind  over  nature  can  be  character- 
ized not  indeed  as  a  demonstrable  causal  law,  but  as  an  indubitable  actual 
result  of  the  history  of  our  race  thus  far.' 

§  18    Agnosticism 

Spencer,  First  Principles. 

It  is  now  in  fashion  to  meet  the  above  question  in  an 
agnostic  spirit.      Such   as  find   no  science  of   history 


STUDY    OF    HISTORY  1 7 

should,  a  fortiori,  admit  no  philosophy,  which  is  usually, 
though  not  always,  the  case.1  Many  believe  in  a 
science,  but  reject  all  philosophy,  of  history.  The 
agnostic  party  has  a  Positivist  or  Kantian2  and  an 
Eclectic  section,  the  former  denying  all  possibility  of 
knowing  ultimate  causes,  or  things  in  se.  The  Eclectics, 
who  include  many  professed  believers  in  final  cause, 
refer  more  to  the  limits  of  man's  cognitive  powers,  yet 
often  speak  as  if  regarding  the  innermost  reality  of  the 
universe  incognizable  by  any  intelligence.  So,  most 
commonly,  in  describing  freedom  and  the  sway  of  per- 
sonal initiative  in  history.  To  this  agnostic  theory, 
whatever  its  form,  the  reply  is  :  Its  assertion  of  our 
ignorance,  as  an  account  of  man's  present  powers  and 
attainments,  is,  in  general,  very  just.  Practically,  at 
present,  the  facts  are  much  as  stated.  But  to  predicate 
of  any  historical  matter  a  final  and  strictly  necessary 
unknowableness,  whether  the  difficulty  be  placed  in  the 
object  or  in  the  faculty  of  knowledge,  involves  in  prin- 
ciple a  scepticism  fatal  to  all  science. 

1  Schlegel,  W.  von  Humboldt,  Augustine,  Bossuet,  and  Shedd  erect  an 
inscrutable  Providence  into  a  principle  of  history.  They  thus,  by  faith, 
secure  in  a  way  a  philosophy  of  history,  but  the  limitation  which  they 
assign  to  our  intelligence  makes  a  deep  science  thereof  impossible.  Lenor- 
mant  loudly  proclaims  himself  a  disciple  of  Bossuet. 

2  The  positivist  and  the  Kantian  view  at  this  point  are  practically  one. 

§  19    Our  Conclusion 

Arnold,  Appendix  to  Inaugural  Lect.    Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,\l\,  n.    Laurent,  Etudes, 

last  vol. 

Not  overlooking  the  defects  of  teleological  theories  as 
often  applied,  we  still  hold  that,  if  thorough,  a  teleologi- 


1 8  HISTORY 

cal  view  of  history  can,  and  that  no  other  can,  answer 
all  the  demands  of  reason.  Such  conviction  by  no 
means  rests  merely  upon  the  order,  progress  and  moral 
bent  observable  in  history  itself.  The  commonest  logi- 
cal processes  applied  in  natural  science,  unless  arbi- 
trarily arrested,  force  thought  down  and  back  to  the 
assumption  of  a  Supreme  Mind,  eternal  Abode  of 
reason,  as  basis  of  the  phenomenal  world.1  From  such 
a  Being  it  were  inconceivable  that  the  universe  should 
issue  as  a  chaos,  heaved  forth  by  blind  push.  It,  and 
history  as  the  evolution  of  its  spiritual  side,  must  pos- 
sess, and  internally,  the  properties  of  order,  system, 
purpose.  Nor  can  we  rationally  confine  these  proper- 
ties in  time,  or  to  main  and  special  events.  '  Through 
the  ages,  one  increasing  purpose  runs.'  Equally  strong 
considerations  assure  us  that  this  purpose  is  moral.2 

1  All  work  in  natural  science  presupposes  that  nature,  however  deep  we 
burrow,  is  knowable.  This  must  mean  that  it  exists,  or  else  consists,  in 
intellectual  categories,  and  this,  that  nature's  very  penetralia  are  subject  to 
cognition.     Whose  ? 

2  '  One  lesson,  and  only  one,  history  may  be  said  to  repeat  with  distinct- 
ness: that  the  world  is  built  somehow  on  moral  foundations;  that,  in 
Ihe  long  run,  it  is  well  with  the  good;  in  the  long  run,  it  is  ill  with  the 
wicked.'  —  Froude. 

§  20    Bearings  of  this  Conception  of  History 

Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,  VII,  iii. 

It  at  once  illustrates  and  confirms  this  thought  of  his- 
tory to  observe  that  through  it  several  important  subsid- 
iary historical  questions  are  either  solved  or  alleviated. 
Thus  :  i  Man's  nature  being  spiritual,  and  its  evolution 
a  progress  toward  a  moral  goal,  theories  of  his  physical 


STUDY    OF   HISTORY  19 

origin  and  unity  cease  to  be  vital.1  2  The  universe 
being  one,  large  influence  upon  man  of  his  environment 
is  to  be  expected  and  freely  admitted.2  3  Apparent 
pauses  in  human  progress  may  be  interpreted  as  ele- 
ments in  a  rhythm.  4  Great  men,  playing,  indeed,  a 
weighty  historical  role,  are  effects  as  well  as  causes.3 
5  Valuable  light  is  shed  on  the  question  between  opti- 
mism and  pessimism.4 

1  Cf.  Ch.  II,  §  1.     Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,  VII,  iv. 

2  But  Buckle  and  writers  of  his  class  have  exaggerated  this.  Situa- 
tion did  much  to  determine  the  early  civilization  of  Greece,  yet  why  were 
Italy,  Spain  and  Britain  so  backward  ?  The  correct  statement  is  '  that 
neither  the  Greeks  in  any  other  land  nor  any  other  people  in  Greece  could 
have  been  what  the  Greeks  in  Greece  actually  were.'  —  Freeman.  Human 
development  requires  occasioning  causes,  but  it  is  humanity's  distinctive 
task  to  create  for  itself  the  world  wherein  it  is  to  find  its  highest  enjoy- 
ments. —  Lotze.  '  That  eternally  blue  heaven  which  laughs  above  Ionia  has 
now  for  two  centuries  renounced  those  miraculous  effects  which  it  must 
have  exerted  once,  and  the  havens  and  bays  of  the  Phoenician  coast  have 
almost  as  long  been  inviting  commerce  and  navigation  in  vain.'  —  Rumelin. 
Rich  soil,  easy  means  of  communication  and  some  rigor  of  climate, '  arous- 
ing wants  without  making  the  satisfaction  of  them  very  difficult,'  seem  to 
have  been  the  main  natural  determinants  of  early  civilization.  Neither 
frigid  nor  torrid  zone  originated  civilization  or  tolerates  it  now  in  any  fine 
form.  Interesting  how  railroads  and  telegraphs  have  rendered  civilization 
unprecedentedly  independent  of  water-ways.  China,  India,  Egypt,  Mex- 
ico, Babylonia,  were  wondrously  fertile.  Herodotus  dared  not  tell  the 
extent  of  the  Babylonian  millet  yield  lest  he  should  be  disbelieved.  Europe 
has  1  mile  of  coast  to  33  square  miles  of  territory;  America  1 :  69;  Austra- 
lia 1 :  73;  Asia  1 :  105;  Africa  1  :  152.  —  Honegger. 

3  •  The  study  of  history  is  the  survey  of  events  as  related  to  great  men.' 
—  Grimm,  Michelangelo,  ch.  ii.  — No  individual  can  guide  his  age  without 
subserving  its  tendencies  or  its  wants,  yet  '  those  mighty  men  who  through 
inventive  genius  or  obstinate  constancy  of  will  have  had  a  decided  influ- 
ence on  the  course  of  history  are  by  no  means  merely  the  offspring  and 
outcome  of  their  age.'  —  Lotze.  So  W.  James,  Atlantic  Mo.,  Oct.,  1880, 
takes  individual  initiative  in  history  as  practically  an  inscrutable  cause, 


20  HISTORY 

Carlyle  was  of  the  same  view.  On  the  other  hand,  in  agreement  with 
Comte,  Spencer,  Stud,  of  Sociol.,  ch.  ii. :  '  Before  the  great  man  can  re- 
make his  society  his  society  must  make  him.  So  that  all  those  changes  of 
which  he  is  the  proximate  initiator  have  their  chief  cause  in  the  genera- 
tions he  descends  from.'  Lotze  notices  that  great  religions  in  particular 
always  attach  to  a  founder. 

4  Any  non-teleological  or  materialistic  view  of  history  must  be  pessi- 
mistic if  logically  carried  out.  Cf.  Ch.  II,  §  16.  Unitarian  Rev.,  1885, 
545  sq- 

§  21     Value  of  Historical  Study 

Adams,  Manual,  Int. 

If  the  above  is  or  approximates  the  correct  notion  of 
history,  the  earnest  study  of  this,  with  however  many  dis- 
couragements beset,  cannot  but  be  profitable.  It  is  so, 
in  fact,  upon  any  view.  No  science,  no  department  of 
knowledge,  can  be  thoroughly  understood  except  in  the 
light  of  its  historical  genesis  and  growth.1  Further,  all 
right  historical  study  tends  to  be :  1  A  prime  aid  to 
culture,  breadth  of  view  and  of  sympathy.2  2  A  first- 
rate  general  discipline  in  reasoning  of  the  practical  kind 
most  needed  in  the  affairs  of  life.  3  An  indispensable 
special  preparation  for  the  worthy  handling  of  great 
questions  in  any  of  the  sciences  relating  to  man.  Chief 
among  the  discouragements  referred  to  are  the  uncer- 
tainty and  indefiniteness  of  data,  and  the  inexhaustible- 
ness  of  the  field.3 

1  L'histoire,  en  effet,  est  la  forme  nicessaire  de  la  science  de  tout  ce  qui 
est  soumis  aux  lots  de  la  vie  changeante  et  successive.  La  science  des 
langues  c'est  l'histoire  des  langues ;  la  science  des  litteratures  et  des  philoso- 
phies, c'est  l'histoire  des  litter atures  et  des  philosophies.  Renan,  Aver  roes 
et  I'averroisme. 

2  'There  is  a  book  which  youth  may  use  to  grow  old,  and  the  old  to 
become  young :  history.'     K.  S.  Zacharia,  quoted  by  Roscher. 

8  Bisset,  Essays  on  Historical  Truth.  Freeman,  Methods  of  Historical 
Study,  ii. 


study  of  history  21 

§  22     Mode  of  Work 

Adams,  Manual,  28  sq.      Freeman,  Methods.      Stubbs,  Med.  and  Mod.  Hist.,  ir,  t. 
Hall  [Editor],  Methods  of  Teaching  Hist,  [contains  excellent  bibliography]. 

For  success  in  this  course  the  first  requisite  is  dili- 
gence. Another  is  to  remember  that  subjects,  not  tasks, 
are  to  be  mastered.  In  historical  reading  thoughtfulness 
is  more  important  than  bulk.1  Well-written  small  vol- 
umes upon  historical  subjects  abound,  helpful  in  utiliz- 
ing time.2  Of  larger  works  read,  and  by  all  means 
purchase,  only  the  best.  Memory  of  main  dates  in 
modern  history  is  important,  but  dates  alone  are  not 
history.  So  of  abridgments,  conspectus,  historical  tables 
and  the  like :  they  are  valuable  auxiliaries,  but  in  no 
sense  substitutes  for  histories  proper.3  Ploetz's  Epi- 
tome is  the  best  conspectus,  and  should  be  in  every 
student's  hands.  Fisher's  Outlines  is  the  best  univer. 
sal  history  in  our  language.  Adams's  Manual,  with  the 
bibliographies  at  the  heads  of  our  Chapters,  will  name 
sufficient  literature.  Another  aid,  quite  indispensable 
to  correct  historical  knowledge,  is  Geography,  constant 
reference  to  which  should  attend  all  historical  reading. 
Freeman's  Historical  Geography  is  the  best  work  extant 
in  this  regard,  though  its  maps  are  for  Europe  only. 
Labberton's  is  the  only  historical  atlas  which  covers 
the  entire  historical  field.  It  is  excellent.4  Serviceable, 
though  less  directly,  is  also  all  acquaintance  with  Eth- 
nology, Philology,  Political  Economy,  Politics,  Statistics, 
Physical  Geography,  Art,  Numismatics.5 

1  Bacon's  apothegm :  '  Read  not  to  contradict  and  confute,  nor  to 
believe  and  take  for  granted,  nor  to  find  talk  and  discourse,  but  to  weigh 
and  consider.     Some  books  are  to  be  tasted,  others  to  be  swallowed,  and 


22  HISTORY 

some  few  to  be  chewed  and  digested.'  Hobbes  used  to  say  '  that  if  he  had 
read  as  much  as  other  men  he  should  have  continued  still  as  ignorant  as 
other  men.' 

-  Epochs  of  Hist.,  Ep.  of  Ecclesiastical  Hist.,  American  Statesmen  Ser., 
American  Commonwealth  Ser.,  Harper's  Half-Hour  Ser.  and  Handy  Ser., 
New  Plutarch  Ser. ,  The  Story  of  the  Nations.  Hist'l  novels  may  here  be 
mentioned,  and  those  of  the  best  sort,  like  Scott's,  George  Eliot's  Romola 
and  Charles  Reade's  Cloister  and  Hearth,  recommended.  Those  by  Ebers, 
Dahn,  Hausrath  and  Eckstein  are  valuable  but  less  masterly,  tending  far 
more  to  assign  modern  thoughts  and  feelings  to  antique  characters. 

8  '  How  index-learning  turns  no  student  pale, 
Yet  holds  the  eel  of  knowledge  by  the  tail.' 

4  For  notice  of  other  atlases,  Adams,  Manual,  68.  Halsey's  Genealogi- 
cal and  Chronological  Chart  is  very  serviceable. 

6  On  the  studies  auxiliary  to  history,  Freeman,  Methods,  i. 

§  23     The  Partition  of  History 

Freeman,  Methods,  Inaug.  and  i.    Mommsen,  Rome,  ch  i.     Stubbs,  Med.  and  Mod. 
Hist.,  iv.    Zeller,  Greek  Philos.,  Int.,  iv. 

History  objective  is  continuous,  knowing  no  periods 
or  breaks,1  but  in  the  study  and  exposition  of  history 
divisions  are  practically  a  necessity,  owing  to  the  finite- 
ness  of  our  mental  powers.  They  should  be  as  little 
artificial  as  possible.  A  highly  convenient  primary 
sundering  is  into  ancient  and  modern  history,  the  turn- 
ing-point being  375  a.d.,  the  beginning  of  the  fatal 
barbarian  irruption  into  the  Roman  Empire,  which  sup- 
plied the  last  essential  ingredient  of  present  western 
civilization.  The  most  facile  cleavage  of  ancient  his- 
tory is  ethnological.  That  of  modern  is  chronological, 
into  periods  :  I,  from  the  beginning  of  the  barbarian 
movement  to  the  discovery  of  America,  375-1492 ;  II, 
from  the  discovery  of  America  to  the  Declaration  of 
American  Independence,  1492-1776;  III,  from  the  Dec- 


STUDY    OF    HISTORY  23 

laration  of  Independence  to  the  present  time.  Mem- 
orable points  in  I :  the  Hegira  of  Mohammed,  622 ;  the 
Battle  of  Poitiers,  732  ;  the  Roman  coronation  of  Karl 
the  Great,  800 ;  the  Treaty  of  Verdun,  843  ;  the  termini 
of  the  Crusades,  1096,  1270.  In  II :  Luther's  excommu- 
nication, 1520;  the  Peace  of  Westphalia,  1648;  the  ter- 
mini of  the  English  Commonwealth,  1649,  1660;  the 
English  Revolution  of  1688 ;  the  Seven  Years'  War, 
1756-1763.  In  III :  the  Launching  of  the  present  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States,  1789;  the  Outbreak  of 
the  French  Revolution,  1789;  the  Vienna  Congress, 
1815;  the  American  War,  1861-1865  ;  the  Battle  of 
Sedan,  1870;  the  Establishment  of  the  present  French 
Republic,  1870,  and  of  the  German  Empire,  1871. 

1  So  Freeman,  also  Zeller,  as  above.  For  grounds  contra,  Mommsen 
and  Stubbs,  as  above.  Certainly  one  may  point  out  great  sui  generis 
reaches  of  history,  and  decisive  turning-points.  Such  were,  1492,  the 
coronation  of  Otho  the  Great  in  962,  and  the  raising  of  the  siege  of  Vienna 
by  Sobieski  in  1683.  Coptic  chronology  dates  everything  from  284  A.D., 
'year  of  the  martyrs'  to  Diocletian's  persecution.  Ranke,  Weltgesch., 
Theil  iv,  emphasizes  602  A.D.,  when  the  powerful  Emperor  Maurice  suc- 
cumbed to  his  troops  and  to  the  city  of  Constantinople,  revolutionizing 
everything  in  the  Orient,  estranging  the  Balkan  peninsula  by  peace  with 
the  Avars  [604],  recognizing  the  independence  of  Lombard  Italy  and 
emancipating  old  Rome  from  the  new.  Sismondi  makes  much  of  the  year 
1000  a.d.,  when  men  gave  up  the  idea  of  bringing  all  humanity  into  one 
monarchy,  which  Dagobert,  the  Caliphs,  Karl  Great  and  Otho  Great  had 
attempted.     He  dates  modern  history  from  1000. 


SELECT    BIBLIOGRAPHY    TO    CHAPTER    II 

Ploetz,  Epitome  of  Universal  H.**  Sayce  [latest  and  best  brief 
account  in  English],  Ancient  Empires  of  the  East.  Maspero,  Histoire 
ancienne  des  peuples  de  /'  Orient.**  Osborn,  Ancient  Egypt  in  the  L't 
of  Mod.  Discovery.  Mommsen,  H.  of  Rome,  Vol.  I.  Fisher,  Outlines 
of  Universal  II.  Myers,  Outlines  of  Ancient  H.  Rawlinson,  Manual 
of  Ancient  H.*;  Origin  of  Nations;  Five  Great  Monarchies  of  the  Ancient 
Eastern  World  [Chaldea,  Assyria,  Babylon,  Media,  Persia  —  4  vols.,  also  3] ; 
Sixth  Great  Oriental  M.  [Parthia];  Seventh  do.  [New  Persian  Empire]; 
Anc.  Eg.,  2  vols.  Duncker,  H.  of  Antiquity,  6  vols,  [the  ablest  single 
authority  extant].  Lenormant,  Histoire  ancienne  de  V  Orient,**  4  vols, 
[there  is  an  abrege\ ;  Beginnings  of  H.  L.  and  Chevalier,  Manual  of 
Ancient  H.,  2  vols.  Dumichen  [in  Oncken's  ser.],  Geschichte  des  alien 
Aegyptens.**  Lehmann,  Gesch.  d.  alien  Indiens  **  [also  in  Oncken. 
The  works  of  this  ser.  are  all  of  value].  Smith  [P.],  H.  of  the  World 
from  Earliest  T.  to  Fall  of  Western  Empire,  3  vols.  Ranke,  Universal 
H.,*  I.  '  Egypt,'  '  Babylonia,' '  Persia,'  '  China,'  '  India,'  '  Phoenicia,'  and 
'  Israel,'  in  the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica  [all  articles  of  the  highest  ability]. 
Smith  [G.],  Assyria.  Sayce,  Babylonia.  Birch,  Egypt.  Vaux,  Persia. 
[The  4  by  Soc.  for  Promoting  Christian  Knowl.     Less  accurate,  '  Egypt,' 

1  Assyria,'  '  Persia,'  '  Chaldea,'  '  Greece,'  '  Rome,'  and  '  Carthage,'  in  Story 
of  the  Nations  Ser.]  Ebers,  Egypt,  2  vols.  Wilkinson,  Ancient  Egyp- 
tians, 3  vols.  Brugsch,  H.  of  Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs,*  2  vols.  Daven- 
port-Adams, Eg.  Past  and  Pres.     Williams,  Middle  Kingdom  [China], 

2  vols.  Perrot  and  Chipiez,  H.  of  Ancient  Art  **  [Chaldea  and  As- 
syria, 2  vols.,  Egypt,  2  vols.].  Menard,  Histoire  des  anciennes  peuples 
de  V Orient.  De  Lanoyc,  Ramses  the  Great.*  Maine,  Anc't  Law*; 
Early  H.  of  Institutions  * ;  Village  Communities.  Fontane,  Histoire  Uni- 
verselle  [16  vols.  'Vedic  India,'  'The  Iranians,'  'The  Egypts,'  and  'The 
Asiatics 'are  the  first  four].  Oldenberg,  Buddha.**  Mariette,  Abregi 
de  r histoire  d' Egypt  [best  account  in  any  one  vol.] .  '  Records  of  the 
Past '  **  [Eng.  tr.  of  Ass'n  and  Eg'n  documents.  London.  Bagster. 
11  vols.].  Niebuhr,  Vortrage  ueber  alte  Geschichte  [tr.,  London,  1852]. 
Grote,  Greece,  Pt.  II,  xvi-xxi,  inc.     Heeren,  Hist'l  Researches,  I—ID. 

On  Prehistoric  Times:  Baldwin,  Prehistoric  Nations.  Lubbock, 
Prehistoric  T. ;  Origin  of  Civilization.  Tylor,  Primitive  Culture;  An- 
thropology; Early  History  of  Mankind.  De  Mortillet,  Prehistorique. 
Dumontier,  Les  stations  de  Vhomme  prehistorique.  Honegger,  Kultur- 
geschichte*  I.  Bray,  Anthropology.  Joly,  Man  before  Metals.  Pack- 
ard, in  Gately's  World's  Progress.  Peschel,  Races  of  Man.*  De 
Nadaillac,  Prehistoric  America.     Keary,  Dawn  of  H.;   Primitive  Belief. 


CHAPTER   II 

THE    OLD    EAST 


§    I       JUVENTUS    MUNDI 

Lubbock,  Prehist.  Times,  ch.  xii.  Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,  VII,  iii.  Lyell,  Geol.  Evid.  tA 
the  Antiq.  of  Man.  Honegger,  Kulturgeschichte,  I,  153  sqq.  Cf.  also  his  Kate- 
chismus  d.  Kulturgesch.    Ranke,  Weltgesch.  I,  30  sq.     Keary,  Dawn  of  Hist. 

Four  topics  in  Anthropology  have  been  much  dis- 
cussed :  the  antiquity '  of  the  human  race,  its  unity  in 
essence,  its  unity  in  geographical  origin,2  and  its  earliest 
intellectual  condition.  Upon  the  last  two  points  there 
is  still  great  disagreement,  some  authorities  maintaining, 
others  denying,  that  the  cradle  of  the  race  was  single ; 
some,  again,  affirming  that  the  earliest  human  ages  were 
an  intellectual  decline ;  others,  that  they  formed  an  as- 
cent from  an  intellectual  condition  much  like  that  of 
brutes.  Respecting  the  other  two  heads  there  is,  and 
can  be,  little  doubt,  viz. :  that  humanity  is  one  in  essence 
and  nature,  and  that  its  life  upon  our  planet,  in  at  least 
some  of  its  branches,  reaches  an  immense  antiquity. 
The  general  intellectual  progress  of  mankind  is  equally 
certain  so  far  as  regards  the  historical  ages.  In  the 
main,  to  the  extent  of  present  knowledge  concerning 
primitive  man,  history  abuts  upon  Natural  History.3 
Pleistocene  man  is  matter  only  for  the  latter  science, 
which  is  as  good  as  true  of  many  peoples  in  every  age, 
and  even  at  present.      Distinguish   then   the   periods 


26  THE   OLD    EAST 

(i)  of  man's  Natural  History,  (2)  between  the  begin- 
ning  of  objective  and  of  subjective  history,  (3)  after  the 
rise  of  subjective  history,  which  as  a  rule  reaches  back 
in  case  of  any  given  people,  to  the  date  of  the  oldest 
contemporary  written  sources  relating  to  that  people, 
in  some  instances  a  little  further.4 

1  Anthropologists  vary  from  8000  to  300,000  years  in  estimates  of  this. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  man  appeared  in  Europe  and  America  before  the 
close  of  the  glacial  period.  Astronomers  [Croll,  Geikie]  put  this  80,000- 
100,000  years  ago;  geologists  so  low  as  8000,  10,000,  or  15,000  years. 
Dr.  L.  E.  Hicks  places  man's  advent  not  later  than  the  beginning  of  the 
Champlain  period,  at  least  20,000  years  ago,  and  thinks  it  may  have  been 
earlier,  at  least  in  Asia  and  Western  North  America,  where  the  genus  pos- 
sibly arrived  sooner  than  on  either  Atlantic  shore.  Grant  Allen  believes 
that  man  was  present  in  miocene  time,  and  Pres.  Warren  [Paradise  Found] 
seems  to  agree  with  him.  A.'s  evidence  is  that  numberless  artificially 
chipped  flints  lie  in  miocene  deposits.  Boyd  Dawkins  admits  this,  but 
views  the  flints  as  the  work  of  apes.  He  makes  the  river  drift  or  pleis- 
tocene the  oldest  man  yet  proved  to  have  existed,  but  thinks  some  of  his 
remains  pre-glacial.  Both  Dawkins  and  Evans  deny  that  any  miocene 
human  fossils  have  been  authenticated  either  in  Italy,  as  argued  by  Cap- 
ellini,  or  in  America,  as  maintained  by  Whitney.  De  Nadaillac  agrees 
with  D.  &  E.  Best  general  discussion  is  still  Lyell  [3d  ed.  Lond.,  1883]. 
Cf.  also  Internat.  Rev.,  Sep.  1882;  Nation,  1883,  p.  300;  '  B.  C.  Y.,'  Re- 
mote Antiq.  of  Man  not  Proven  [Lond.,  1882]. 

2  Lenormant,  Hist,  ancienne,  I,  discusses  this  most  fully.  He  is  a  pro- 
nounced monogenesist,  as  are  Peschel,  Sayce,  and  Rawlinson  [Manual,  5]. 
Reinsch  too,  who,  however,  locates  the  cradle  in  Central  Africa.  The 
boldest  polygenesist  is  a  writer  in  No.  17  of  '  Ausland''  for  1875.  He 
believes  in  eight  cradles,  —  Chinese- Japanese,  Indian-Malay,  Iranian- 
Semitic,  Egyptian,  European,  Arabic,  Aztec,  and  Peruvian.  —  Rocholl,  379. 
Lotze,  Mik.  VII,  iv,  shows  how  slight  the  moral  consequence  of  this  ques- 
tion. Maspero,  132,  says  all  early  tradition  points  to  a  single  cradle.  Cf. 
on  this,  §  5,  n.  2.  Kant  in  one  place  pronounces  for  monogenesis,  in 
another  thinks  it  scarcely  consonant  with  nature's  usual  care :  '  The  first 
man  would  drown  himself  in  the  first  pool  he  saw.'  Anthropologie,  Th. 
I,E. 


THE   OLD    EAST  2J 

*  Ritter  beautifully  names  animals  man's  older  brothers.  I.e.,  so  far  back 
as  we  can  distinctly  trace,  primitive  man  led  but  an  animal  life.  Mining 
and  incipient  manufacturing,  villages  and  government  might  antedate 
moral  life  and  so  belong  to  man's  Natural  H.  rather  than  to  history.  Ch. 
I,  §  3.  '  Hardly  disputable  that  our  civilization  must  have  grown  up  from 
simple  and  indigenous  beginnings  along  the  path  of  a  gradual  and  much 
interrupted  development.' — Lotze.  There  is,  however,  as  yet,  no  scientific 
proof  that  man  was  evolved  from  the  ape,  even  physically,  the  oldest  skulls 
known  indicating  higher  intelligence  than  those  of  some  races  now  existent. 
1  The  evolutionist  is  right  as  to  the  method  of  progress,  but  the  believer  in 
special  creations  is  right  as  to  the  cause  of  progress.  God  is  the  author  of 
all  life  changes,  but  he  has  chosen  to  produce  them  by  the  continuous 
action  of  natural  forces.  Terrestrial  life  is  both  an  evolution  and  a  crea- 
tion.'  Hicks. 

4  Being  traced,  that  is,  by  means  of  archaeology  and  philology;  but 
contemporary  written  sources  alone  can  assure  a  connected  account.  — 
Mommsen,  Rome,  I,  i;  Max  Miiller,  Contemp.  Rev.,  Oct.,  1882;  Free- 
man, Sketch  of  Eur.  H.,  31.  Lepsius  hails  it  as  the  distinctive  supe- 
riority of  Egyptian  history,  that  its  contemporary  sources,  not  yet  half 
explored,  are  so  complete.  Cf.  Lenormant,  Hist,  anc,  praf.  vii.  Sallust 
had  seen  native  histories  of  Carthage,  which  have  since  perished. 


§  2     The  Oldest  History 

Mahaffy,  Prolegomena  to  Anc.  Hist.     Lenormant,  praef.  to  Hist.  anc. 

The  study  of  history  is  no  longer  permitted  to  begin 
with  Greece  and  Rome.1  Ancient  civilization,  it  has 
been  found,  had  much  solidarity.2  From  the  newest 
investigations,  oriental  history  appears  almost  as  closely 
bound  up  with  classical  as  this  is  with  modern.  What 
was  once  mere  suspicion  of  such  continuity,  thanks  to 
men  like  Champollion  and  Rawlinson,3  has  become  cer- 
tainty. In  many  lines  the  connection  has  been  traced, 
as  Greek  and  Etruscan4  art  to  Nineveh.  Deciphered 
hieroglyphics  and  wedge-characters6  disclose  a  new 
world.      Forty  centuries  of   Egyptian  life  and  deeds. 


28  THE   OLD   EAST 

mostly  unknown  before,  now  lie  open  to  the  light.  Egyp- 
tian affairs,  like  those  of  a  modern  state,  may  be  studied 
from  original  and  contemporary  documents.  The  nature 
and  development  of  Egyptian  art  and  religion  can  be 
scanned  to  the  details.  Of  Assyria  the  resurrection  has 
been  about  equally  complete,  throwing  the  most  valu- 
able and  unexpected  light  upon  the  Bible  and  upon  the 
entire  march  of  Asiatic  and  early  European  civilization. 

1  Freeman,  Rede  Lect,  Oxford  Inaug.,  and  elsewhere,  insists  strongly 
and  well  on  the  unity  of  all  history,  yet  inconsistently  seems  willing  to 
take  European  history  as  a  whole  by  itself.  This  involves  tfte  same  essen- 
tial error  against  which  he  is  so  loud,  of  sharp  division  between  ancient 
and  modern. 

2  Especially  cannot  Jewish  history  be  understood  alone.  '  Many  relig- 
ious ideas  and  stories  commonly  regarded  especially  Jewish  are  found  on 
Babylonian  clay  tablets.  The  Sabbath,  name  and  all,  is  Babylonian.'  — 
Fried.  Delitzsch.  Max  Miiller  adm.  no  doubt  that  by  Solomon's  time  even 
India  was  in  communication  with  Palestine.  Sanscrit  words  occur  in  O. 
T.  Solomon's  judgment  regarding  the  child  claimed  by  two  mothers  is 
current  in  India.  —  Contemp.  Rev.,  Oct.,  1882.  M.  assures  us  that  many 
other  similar  accounts  are  common  to  India  and  the  West,  as  that  of  the 
ass  in  the  lion's  skin,  in  Plato's  Cratylus.  Solomon's  Song  could  almost 
have  been  borrowed,  so  close  the  resemblance,  from  the  Egyptian  love- 
songs  rendered  by  Maspero  in  the  Journal  asiatique,  Janvier,  1883.  The 
whole  of  Asia,  including  China,  was  almost  one  land. 

8  Champollion  le  Jeune,  so  called  to  distinguish  him  from  Champollion 
Figeac,  his  elder  brother,  also  an  Egyptologist  of  mark.  The  Rawlinson 
named  is  Sir  Henry,  not  Professor  George,  the  author  of  the  Manual  and 
other  works  mentioned  in  the  bibliography. 

*  Mommsen  inclines  to  minimize  Asiatic  influence  in  early  Italian  civ- 
ilization, and  thinks  it  was  exerted  altogether  through  Greece. 

6  Hieroglyphics,  Egypt;  wedge-characters,  Assyria.  Wiedemann  says 
that  we  can  trace  consecutively  the  march  of  Egyptian  history  from  be- 
tween 4000  and  3000  B.C.,  that  of  Mesopotamia,  not  quite  so  thoroughly, 
owing  to  the  greater  difficulty  of  the  Keihchrift,  from  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury. Maspero :  '  In  a  few  years  Egyptologists  will  decipher  the  historic 
and  literary  texts  in  their  hands  with  as  much  certitude  as  Latinists  read 


THE    OLD    EAST  2<) 

Cicero  or  Titus  Livy.'  'One  could,  from  the  accounts  gathered  in  the 
tombs,  reconstruct  the  royal  almanac  of  Khufu's  court  down  to  its  minut- 
est details.'  Of  Assyria  :  '  In  less  than  thirty  years  [from  the  discovery  of 
Nineveh  by  Botta  in  1846]  a  new  world  of  unknown  tongues  and  peoples 
has  opened  itself  to  study,  while  thirty  centuries  of  history  have  come  forth 
from  the  tombs  and  reappeared  in  the  blaze  of  day.' 


§  3     Its  Bearers 

Lotze,  Mik.,  VII,  v.    Freeman,  Hist'l  Geog.,  ch.  1,  §  3. 

The  historical  nations  of  antiquity  were  very  few, 
including,  besides  Greece  and  Rome,  merely  China  and 
India  with  the  members  of  the  later  Persian  empire, 
viz.,  Babylonia,  Assyria,  Phoenicia,  Lydia,  Israel,  and 
Egypt.  Of  these  lands  mark  that :  I  They  formed  the 
theatre  of  history's  most  stupendous  military  move- 
ments and  conquests.1  2  All  their  peoples  save 
the  Chinese,  were  Caucasians 2 ;  these,  Mongolians. 
3  Among  the  Caucasians  the  Hamite  family  earliest 
developed  culture  and  empire,  then  the  Semites,3  third 
the  Aryans,  the  last  finally  playing  by  far  the  most 
important  part.  4  Each  of  the  ancient  civilized  nations 
was  favored  not  only  by  great  agricultural  and  mineral 
resources,  but  in  particular  by  rare  facilities  for  com- 
merce, while  on  the  other  hand  some  non-historic 
peoples  of  those  times  enjoyed  these  natural  advan- 
tages in  as  high  a  degree  as  they.4  5  China  and  India, 
the  eastern  section  of  the  old  historic  world,  were 
the  special  home  of  stationary  institutions  ;  western 
civilization  was  even  then  distinguished  for  life  and 
movement.5 

1  Those  of  Chedorlaomer,  Ninus,  Semiramis,  Tiglath-pilezer,  Assurbani- 
pal,  Ramses  II,  Cyrus,  Cambyses,  Alexander,  Omar,  Haroun,  Mahmoud. 


30  THE    OLD    EAST 

Jenghis  Khan,  Tamerlane,  Godfrey  de  Bouillon,  Saladin.  One  might  add 
Napoleon  and  Mehemet  Ali. 

2  The  oldest  known  inhabitants  of  the  Euphrates  Valley  were  partly 
Turanian  [non-Caucasian],  in  part  Hamitic  [Lower  Tigris  Valley],  in  part 
Semitic  [Assur].  But  few  Turanian  traits  remained  at  the  time  whence 
their  connected  history  can  be  traced,  unless  with  Oppert  we  regard  the 
basis  of  the  Assyrian  language  Turanian.  Cf.  §  9.  This  early  eminence 
of  the  Turanian  stock  seems  to  have  been  destined  to  be  its  last. 

8  Homrnel,  Die  Semitischen  Vdlker  u.  Sprachen.  2  Bde.  Hamites 
first,  i.e.,  in  Egypt  and  Babylonia;  then  the  Semites,  viz.,  the  Lydians  and 
also,  substantially,  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians  during  the  period  of 
their  great  history.  Aryans  last,  i.e.,  the  Persians,  Greeks,  and  Romans. 
'  It  is  a  growing  conviction  of  ethnologists  and  philologists  that  the  primi- 
tive home  of  the  white-skinned  population  which  first  spoke  the  languages 
of  the  Aryan  family,  was  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  Baltic,  and  that  this 
population  still  survives  in  its  purest  form  in  the  southern  parts  of  Sweden 
and  Norway.'  —  Sayce.  The  old  Egyptians,  from  whom  the  modern  Copts 
have  come,  appear  to  have  been  of  the  same  stock  as  the  Iberians  and 
Etruscans  and  the  present  Basques  and  Berbers.  This,  to  be  sure,  is  still 
sub  judice.  F.  W.  Newman's  Libyan  Vocabulary  [Lond.,  1882]  shows  all 
the  present  languages  of  Xo.  Africa  to  be  closely  related  to  the  Semitic. 
It  is  certain,  at  any  rate,  that  the  Etruscan  was  no  branch  of  Aryan  speech. 
Pauli,  Etrusk.  Forschungen,  pt.  iii.  The  Semites  [of  Assyria-Babylon] 
led  civilization  from  the  13th  cent.  B.C.  to  the  7th  and  even  the  6th.  They 
then  yielded  to  the  Aryans,  though  never  ceasing  to  be  active,  and  at 
length,  after  Mohammed,  placed  themselves  at  the  head  again.  Subse- 
quently to  this  occurred  the  renaissance  of  Mongol  [non-Caucasian]  power 
under  Jenghis  Khan  [1206  A.D.,  and  later]  and  Tamerlane  [c.  1402]. 

*  See  Gryzanowski's  comparison  [N.  A.  Rev.,  Oct.,  1871]  of  Sardinia 
with  Sicily,  showing  that  everything  but  man  has  favored  Sardinia.  —  James, 
Atlantic  Mo.,  Oct.,  1880;  Gordon,  Climate  in  Relation  to  Org.  Nature 
[Vic.  Inst.  Ser.].  Notice  upon  the  map  of  ancient  Eg.  how  civilization 
clung  to  the  Nile.  But  large  parts  of  Arabia  were  conditioned  as  favorably 
for  civilization  as  any  in  the  world,  without  producing  it. 

5  Klemm  divides  peoples  into  active  and  passive.  Guizot,  unjustly, 
ranks  Egypt  no  less  than  India  as  passive,  an  estimate  less  and  less  possi- 
ble as  Egypt's  genius  becomes  known.  But  if  Egypt  was  less  sluggish 
than  India,  it  was  more  so  than  Assyria,  Phoenicia  or  Greece. 


the  old  east  3 1 

§  4    Eastward  the  Course  of  Empire 

Honegger,  Kulttirgesch.  I,  53  sqq. 

While  viewed  at  any  given  moment  ancient  civiliza- 
tion increases  in  brilliancy  from  east  to  west,  the  chron- 
ological progress  of  its  origination  is  rather  from  west 
to  east.1  Egypt  possesses  a  high  civilization  at  least 
twelve  centuries  before  our  earliest  record  of  a  Chinese 
emperor.  Babylon  is  a  centre  of  light  while  the  fathers 
of  the  Hindoos  still  tend  their  flocks  in  Iran.  The 
Hindoos  too  must  have  carried  an  advanced  culture 
with  them  down  the  Indus,  the  Sanscrit  having  been  a 
perfect  literary  language  by  1500  B.C.  Yet  the  Vedas 
are  not  the  oldest  literature.  One  part  of  the  Egyptian 
papyrus  'Prisse'2  hails  from  before  3000,  and  hiero- 
glyphic writing  itself  is  older  than  history.  This  papy- 
rus is  an  ethical  document.  The  peoples 3  from  whom 
sprung  the  Chaldeans  in  Babylonia  had  a  theology,  a 
regular  law-code  and  the  rudiments  of  writing.  The 
earliest  certified  pieces  of  Chinese  literature  scarcely 
reach  further  back  than  the  thirteenth  century.  In 
Egypt,  again,  under  dynasty  iii,  so  early  as  2800  at 
least,  not  only  agriculture  and  very  many  difficult 
mechanic  arts  but  even  several  of  the  fine  arts  were  in 
an  amazingly  forward  state,  implying  high  intelligence 
and  thorough  social  organization.4  The  great  Sphinx 
of  Ghizeh  and  the  temple  near  it  quite  antedate  history, 
and  are  the  oldest  creations  of  man.5  Scientific  astron- 
omy goes  back  in  Egypt  at  least  to  2J82,6  in  Babylon 
to  2234,  in  China  only  to  the  twelfth  century. 

1  Some  earliest  historical  dates  are,  approximately :  for  Egypt,  3892; 
for  Babylon,  2500;   for  China,  2400  (less  certain  than  the  others);   Abra- 


32  THE    OLD   EAST 

ham.  2000;  for  oldest  Vedic  literature,  1600;  Moses,  also  arrival  ot  Hin- 
doos at  the  Ganges,  1300;  for  Assyria,  1200;  for  Phoenicia,  1050;  first 
Olympiad,  776;  Roma  condita,  753  [Varro],  752  [Cato];  for  Lydia,  724; 
for  Persia,  558;  Buddha,  550.  No  connected  Biblical  chronology  earlier 
than  King  Saul,  about  1 100.  The  date  given  for  Eg.  is  Lepsius's  and  is 
quite  within  bounds.  Boeckh  says  5  700;  Mariette,  5004;  Benloew,  4500 ; 
Lenormant,  'more  than  4000.'  Oppert  says:  'not  40  but  70  centuries 
look  down  from  the  pyramids ' ;  Maspero :  '  5000  years  between  dates  of 
our  earliest  and  our  latest  Egypt'n  documents.'  In  giving  so  high  figures 
Lenormant,  Mariette,  and  Maspero  seem  to  follow  Manetho,  whom  German 
writers  discredit  mainly  on  a  priori  grounds.  —  Len.  Hist,  anc,  II,  71 ;  cf. 
§  6.  These  dates  resemble  little  enough  those  from  Kohlrausch's  tables 
which  all  the  schoolboys  of  Europe  had  to  give  thirty  years  ago :  creation, 
3484  B.C.;  deluge,  2328;  Noah's  sons,  1656,  etc.  The  Jewish  calendar 
pretends  to  reckon  from  the  creation  of  the  world,  which  it  places  3760 
years  and  3  months  B.C.  Most  partisans  of  the  Samaritan  text  of  the  O.  T. 
put  Christ's  birth  in  the  4305th  year  of  the  world;  the  LXX  in  the  5270th 
or  the  5873d,  according  to  mode  of  reckoning.  The  fact  is  that  the  Bible 
does  not  determine  primordial  human  chronology  or  assign  any  date  for 
the  creation  of  man.  So  Rawlinson  [G.]  and,  most  emphatically,  Lenor- 
mant [who  was  a  devout  Catholic]  Hist,  anc,  I,  7,  209  sqq.  On  Abraham's 
date,  Zeitschr.  fiir  Volkswirtschaft,  etc.,  XXIII,  2,  141,  which  puts  his 
death  in  2037  B.C.  As  date  for  Moses,  Poole  and  Rawlinson  say  1652, 
Bunsen  and  Lepsius  1320.  Honegger  believes  that  safe  chronology  regard- 
ing China  does  not  reach  beyond  the  8th  or  9th  cent.  B.C.  Objective 
Phoenician  h.  probably  goes  back  at  least  to  2000  B.C.,  but  we  cannot  fix 
dates  there  anterior  to  1050.  The  Tyrian  priests  dated  their  city  from 
2750.  —  Maspero,  192.  The  Homeric  poems  in  their  present  form  are  not 
older  than  850.  Ranke  makes  Pheidon  [d.  660]  founder  of  the  naval 
power  of  Argos,  the  earliest  historical  character  of  Greece.  The  Hera- 
cleidae,  the  heroes  of  the  Spartan-Messenian  war  and  even  Lycurgus  he 
regards  as  sagenhaft.  Nor  will  he  concede  that  any  Roman  date  is  strictly 
historical  till  the  Gallic  invasion,  364  a.  v.  c,  389  B.C.    Weltgesch.,  II,  8,  n. 

2  This  hoary  document,  now  in  the  Biblioth'eque  Nationale  at  Paris, 
was  composed,  its  oldest  part  under  Snefru  of  dynasty  iii,  the  rest  under 
dynasty  v.  Our  copy  is  perhaps  contemporary  but  certainly  not  later 
than  dynasty  xii.  —  Lenormant;  Maspero,  85.  It  is  the  oldest  book  in  the 
world. 

8  Maspero,  139;   cf.  146  sqq.     Lenorm.,  Hist,  anc,  I,  363. 

4  In  the  grotto-tombs  of  Benihassan,  dating  from   Snefru  of  dyn.  iii, 


THE    OLD    EAST  33 

these  arts   are  pictured  as  in  exercise.  —  Weber,  Weltgesch.,  I,  52,  54; 
Lenorm.,  II,  67.     Wiedemann  refers  all  this  to  before  3500. 

5  Unless,  as  Wiedemann  judges,  some  statues  are  older. 

6  The  figure  2782  is  gotten  by  reckoning  back  from  1322  B.C.,  when  we 
know  that  the  Egyptian  Sirius  year  and  civil  year  coincided.  Assuming 
their  dissidence  to  have  been  \  day,  1460  years  before  1322,  i.e.,  in  2782, 
they  would  have  coincided  previously.  2234  is  from  Simplicius,  who  de- 
clared that  when  Alexander  reached  Babylon  astronomical  observations 
there  went  back  1903  years.  Chinese  history  records  that  in  the  12th  cen- 
tury B.C.,  'Tschin  Koning,  in  the  city  of  Ly,  measured  the  length  of  the 
sun's  shadow  at  solstice  with  the  utmost  precision.' 


§  5     Diversity  and  Unity 

Mommsen,  Rome,  I,  42,  46,  275.    Lotze,  Mik.,  VII,  iii.    '  Calendar,'  in  Encyc.  Brit. 

Primitive  civilization  is  largely  homogeneous,  at  once 
result  and  proof  of  mankind's  unity.  The  use  in  com- 
mon of  speech,  the  existence  of  sun-worship,  of  a  lunar 
calendar  and  so  on,  among  many  peoples,  do  not  show 
their  culture  to  have  had  a  common  historical  root.1 
Yet  so  far  as  concerns  Asiatic  civilization  we  must 
suppose  either  unity  of  origin  or  great  international 
influence.2  Everywhere  here  we  find  (i)  a  separation 
of  the  world's  history  into  four  great  periods,  (2)  about 
2500  b.c.  regarded  as  a  special  epoch,  (3)  a  tradition  of 
a  flood,  (4)  a  lunar  calendar,  involving  the  seven-day 
week,  and  the  'nycthemera.'3  The  Babylonians,  Hin- 
doos and  Chinese  further  agreed  in  employing  a  sixty- 
year  period.  The  Egyptians  on  the  other  hand  began 
the  day  at  midnight,  had  a  week  of  ten  days,  a  month 
of  thirty  and  a  year  of  twelve  such  months,  though 
corrected  by  the  sun.4  They  had  an  Apis-cycle  of 
twenty-five  years,  a  thirty-year  cycle  and  a  Sirius-cycle, 
no  one  of  which  was  known  in  Asia.     Also  they  had  no 


34  THE   OLD    EAST 

tradition  whatever  of  a  flood.  But  Egyptian  weights 
and  measures  agreed  with  the  Babylonian,  and  Egyptian 
caste  and  worship  of  animals  remind  us  of  India. 
These  considerations,  joined  with  still  weightier  ones, 
ethnological  and  philological,  make  it  nearly  certain 
that  even  Egyptian  civilization,  though  in  very  ancient 
form  and  times,  came  from  Asia.  The  existence  of  a 
commanding  international  influence  later  is  beyond 
question,  Egypt  and  Babylon  its  especial  centres.  The 
Phoenician  alphabet,  basis  of  all  others,  is  but  a  modi- 
fication of  signs  taken  from  the  Egyptian  hieratic 
speech.5 

1  Many  ideas  and  usages  may  be  common  to  several  peoples  without 
indicating  that  such  peoples  had  common  descent  or  even  intercourse. 
Attention  to  this  obvious  truth  would  have  saved  sciolists  much  pains. 
Thus  among  the  aborigines  upon  the  River  Darling,  New  So.  Wales,  chil- 
dren succeed  to  rank  of  mother,  as  in  Old  Egypt.  So  of  many  if  not 
most  of  the  myths,  proverbs,  habits,  etc.,  having  nearly  world-wide  preva- 
lence, canvassed  by  Tylor,  Early  H.  of  Mankind,  Pt.  II,  viii,  ix.  Cf.  Miss 
Emerson's  Indian  Myths  [Boston,  1884].  Zeller,  Greek  Philosophy,  I, 
p.  42,  adverts  to  some  strong  resemblances  between  Greek  and  Asiatic 
philos.,  unaccompanied  by  any  proof  of  historical  connection.  Intercourse 
will  account  for  more  than  community  of  origin.  The  story  of  Moses  hid- 
den in  the  bulrushes  is  almost  exactly  related  of  Saryoukin  and  of  Semir- 
amis.  —  Lenorm.,  Hist,  anc,  I,  175,  277.  On  accounts  of  the  flood  and  of 
the  Tower  of  Babel,  Maspero,  160  sqq.  Lotze  thinks  that  even  the  flood- 
tradition  may  have  arisen  independently  in  various  centres,  among  the 
American  Indians  as  among  the  Mesopotamian  Cushites.  Not  so  in  ail 
such  cases:  'Our  nursery  tales  contain  echoes  from  the  very  earliest 
antiquity;  the  same  fables  that  exercise  our  reflection  in  youth  were  once 
told  in  India,  Persia  and  Greece,  and  many  popular  superstitions  of 
to-day  have  their  root  in  heathendom.' 

2  Sayce  does  not  agree  with  Lenormant  in  placing  Eden,  according  to 
Zend  tradition,  in  the  highlands  of  Hindu  Rush,  but  rather  with  Delitzsch 
[  Wo  lag  Parodies  ?"],  who  locates  it  in  Babylonia.  Sayce  sees  no  trace  or 
possibility  of  contact  between  the  early  Aryans  of  the  far  East  and  the 


THE    OLD    EAST  35 

Accadians  and  Semites  of  the  Euphrates  Valley,  until  the  time,  9th  cen- 
tury B.C.,  when  Phoenician  ships  traded  to  Ophir  and  the  Assyrian  mon- 
archy came  into  relation  with  the  Medes.  He  regards  the  resemblance 
between  our  account  of  Paradise  and  that  of  the  Persians  as  due  to 
borrowing  by  them  in  later  times.     Academy,  Oct.  7,  1882. 

8  '  Night-day,'  24  hours,  beginning  with  evening.  Natural,  because  the 
new  moon,  first  noticed  at  evening,  began  the  month.  '  Chodhesh,'  in 
Hebrew,  means  both  '  new  moon '  and  '  lunar  month.'  The  seven-day 
week  probably  originated  from  the  moon's  phases,  or  from  division  of  the 
days  in  a  periodic  lunation  by  4,  though  in  Babylon,  at  a  late  period,  it 
seems  to  have  been  connected  with  the  seven  planets.  Since  the  captivity 
the  Jews  have  always  used  a  lunar  calendar,  more  or  less  modified  by 
notice  of  solar  changes.  Wolf-Baudissin,  '  Mond,'  in  Herzog-Plitt's 
Realencyc.  All  Mohammedan  peoples  also  still  retain  the  lunar  year, 
about  1 1  days  shorter  than  the  solar. 

4  All  of  which  proves  that  the  Egyptians  once  possessed  great  intel- 
lectual independence.  To  them  the  entire  civilized  world  is  indebted  for 
modes  of  reckoning  time.  The  Julian  day  was  from  them,  only  11'  12'' 
too  long,  which  Pope  Gregory  XIII,  in  1582,  corrected  so  closely  that 
3333J  years  will  be  required  again  to  bring  an  error  of  a  day. 

6  See  §  13. 

§  6     Egypt 

Dunckcr,  B.  I.    '  Manetho'  and  'Egypt,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.    Sayce,  Ancient  Empires,  i. 
Tompkins  et  a/.,  Recent  Egyptological  Research. 

The  history  of  Ancient  Egypt  proper,  of  Egypt  under 
the  Pharaohs,  ends  with  the  victory  of  Cambyses,  525.1 
There  was  an  Old  Kingdom  and  a  New,  divided  by  cen- 
turies and  with  very  distinct  characteristics.  At  first 
there  existed  many  separate  states,  which  were  at  length 
fused  into  two  great  principalities,  Lower  Egypt  to 
the  point  of  the  delta  and  Upper  Egypt  to  the  first 
cataract.  Later  both  came  under  the  one  sway2  of  the 
first  historic  king,  Mena,  founder  of  the  Old  Kingdom. 
The  earlier  petty  states  became  nomes  or  counties,3  and 
the  efforts  of  the  vassal  counts  after  independence  and 


36  THE   OLD    EAST 

empire  form  a  leading  element  in  all  Egyptian  history. 
In  not  a  few  cases  accounts  of  rival  kings  greatly  aggra- 
vate the  task  of  chronologists. 

1  5000  (at  least),  beginnings  of  Egyptian  civilization.  3892,  Mena 
founds  Old  Kingdom.  3000,  the  great  pyramids.  2090-1830,  Hycsos, 
sway  over  all  Egypt.  1580,  Hycsos  driven  from  Lower  Egypt;  New 
Kingdom.  1599-1560,  Tahout-mes  III;  Golden  age;  Dynasties  xviii  and 
xix.  724-671,  Ethiopian  domination.  671,  Assur-a'h-iddin's  (Assyrian) 
conquest.  525,  Cambyses'  conquest.  332,  Alexander's  conquest.  30, 
Octavian :  Egypt  a  Roman  province.  The  older  dates  here  given  accord 
with  Duncker's,  and  are  within  bounds.  Henne  places  Mena  61 17  B.C.; 
Mahaffy,  5000;  Brugsch,  4393;  Hofmann,  2182.  Well  might  the  old 
priest  of  Sals  say :  '  O  Solon,  Solon,  you  Hellenes  are  but  children  and 
there  is  never  an  old  man  who  is  a  Hellene.  In  mind  you  are  all  young. 
There  is  no  old  opinion  handed  down  among  you  by  ancient  tradition, 
nor  any  science  hoary  with  age.'  —  Plato,  Timasus,  22.  It  is  customary  to 
reduce  the  higher  dates  of  Egyptian  chronology  by  doubling  more  or 
fewer  of  Manetho's  dynasties;  i.e.,  taking  them  as  parallel.  Lenormant 
declares  that  no  fact  has  been  adduced  to  prove  the  rightfulness  of  this. 
He  agrees  with  Mariette  in  regarding  them  as  serial,  believing  that  Manetho 
omitted  all  but  the  legitimate  ones.  The  ablest  discussion  is  by  Mariette, 
reproduced  for  substance  by  Lenorm.,  Hist.  anc.  II,  32  sqq.  Maspero  and 
Mahaffy  seem  to  favor  this  theory,  and  Sayce  adopts  it.  —  Ancient  Empires, 
16.  For  the  difficulties  of  the  subject,  see  the  articles  named  above  under 
the  caption  of  this  §.  One  trouble  is  that  the  Egyptians  themselves  reck- 
oned from  no  era.     None  but  astronomers  kept  in  mind  2782  [§  4,  n.  6]. 

2  The  kings  after  Mena  were  called  '  lords  of  the  two  realms,'  and  the 
crown,  'the  double  crown.' 

8  As  occurred  in  Saxon  England.  On  this  phase  of  Egyptian  history, 
Lenorm.,  Hist,  anc,  II,  53-64,  160,  297;   Maspero,  177. 

§  7    The  Old  Kingdom 

Osborn,  Ancient  Egypt.    Ratvlinson,  Anc.  Egypt.    '  Egypt,'  in  Encyc.  Brit. 

This  had  Memphis  for  capital.  Besides  Mena,  Snefru, 
of  dynasty  iii,  conqueror  of  Arabia  Petraea,  and  Khufu,1 
Kha-f-Ra  and  Men-k^-Ra,  of  dynasty  iv,  builders  of  the 


THE   OLD   EAST  37 

great  pyramids,  were  its  most  famous  kings.  Tablets 
from  Snefru's  time  2  show  us  art  wonderfully  advanced, 
and  civilization  in  general  as  completely  organized  as  at 
the  Persian  or  the  Macedonian  conquest,  with  a  physi- 
ognomy thoroughly  its  own  and  marks  of  a  long  past. 
Egyptian  as  a  separate  language,  also  hieroglyphic  writ- 
ing, have  attained  perfection.3  Khufu's  pyramid,  awful 
in  its  proportions,4  the  most  stupendous  of  all  human 
works,  reveals  a  practical  skill  in  engineering  and  archi- 
tecture never  yet  outdone.  Drawing  and  sculpture  in 
some  respects  already  approach  final  perfection.  With 
dynasty  iv  the  glory  of  the  Old  Kingdom  attained  its 
height.  Rebellions  and  civil  wars  ensued ;  the  con- 
quests in  Arabia  and  Nubia  were  lost,  and  from  the  vith 
to  the  xith  dynasty  civilization  itself  wellnigh  suffered 
eclipse.  Meantime  the  vassal  power  of  Thebes  grew, 
until  its  prince,  the  renowned  Monthu-hotpu,5  subjected 
all  Egypt,  even  the  capital,  to  his  sway,  preparing  the 
way  for  dynasty  xii,  and  for  what  Lenormant  styles  the 
Middle  Kingdom.  Art  and  science  now  bloom  again. 
Dynasties  xi  and  xii  cover  the  special  period  of  Egyp- 
tian internal  improvements  and  development  in  the 
useful  arts.  Men  weave,  make  pottery,  blow  glass,  work 
gold.  Moeris,  the  Labyrinth  and  Benihassan 6  are  now 
constructed.  The  religion  of  Osiris,7  also  the  Book  of 
the  Dead,8  originated  under  these  dynasties.  Dynasty 
xii  reconquered  Nubia  and  the  Sinaitic  peninsula.  Then 
civilization  again  entered  penumbra,  and  at  length,  with 
the  victorious  invasion  of  the  Hycsos,9  became  totally 
obscured. 

1  The  Cheops,  Chefren  and  Mycerinus,  of  Herodotus.  It  is  better, 
where  possible,  to  transliterate  Egyptian  names,  of  doing  which  there  are 
several  modes.     Maspero  uses  '  w '  for  Lenormant's  •  f.' 


38  THE   OLD    EAST 

2  Not  later,  and  probably  much  earlier,  than  2800  B.C.     Cf.  §  4,  n.  4. 

8  We  have  from  this  period  a  picture  of  a  scribe  at  work  with  pen,  ink- 
stand and  papyrus,  indicating  that  the  hieroglyphs  were  already  beginning 
to  assume  a  cursive  character. 

4  Base,  746  ft.;  height,  450  ft.  For  the  Chefren  these  dimensions  are 
690J  and  447J.  Both  piles  must  have  been  much  larger  originally.  Herod- 
otus makes  the  Cheops  8  plethra  in  both  length  and  height.  It  took 
100,000  men  ten  years  simply  to  construct  the  causeway  by  which  the 
stone  for  this  pyramid  was  transported  from  the  quarries  to  the  Nile 
boats. 

s  Or  Mentouhotep  [Maspero].  He  was  not  the  first  prince  of  the 
name,  nor  the  first  to  cast  off  the  bonds  of  vassalage,  but  the  first  really  to 
rule  the  entire  land.  Lenorm.  assigns  19  centuries  to  the  Old  Kingdom, 
exclusive  of  the  Middle.  There  is  much  propriety  in  separating  the  Middle 
from  the  Old.  Stern,  Deutsche  Revue,  Oct.,  1882,  shows  that  the  dearth 
of  records  just  before  dynasty  xi  is  nearly  as  complete  as  during  the 
Hycsos  devastation. 

6  Porticos  of  some  of  the  tombs  of  Benihassan  have  columns  of  the 
purest  Doric  style,  '  anterior  by  at  least  two  thousand  years  to  the  oldest 
columns  of  this  order  that  were  erected  in  Greece.'  —  Maspero.  Moeris  was 
an  enormous  lake,  built  by  Amenemhat  III,  dynasty  xii,  to  retain  and  utilize 
the  waters  of  the  Nile  overflow.  —  Herodotus,  II,  49.  The  Labyrinth,  near 
by,  was  a  vast  quadrangular  stone  palace,  containing,  it  is  said,  three  thou- 
sand rooms,  each  perfectly  square,  and  covered  with  a  single,  massive  con- 
cave slab.  The  rooms  were  so  connected  that  once  in,  a  stranger  without 
guidance  was  lost.  The  grotto-tombs  of  Benihassan  were  the  cemetery  of 
the  hereditary  princes  of  Meh.  It  is  from  the  scenes  graven  in  their 
eternal  stones  that  we  learn  as  above  of  the  state  of  the  arts  under  dy- 
nasty xii. 

7  The  god  Osiris  was  a  more  human  form  of  the  higher  [supreme  ?]  god, 
Ra.     See  '  Egypt,'  in  Encyc.  Brit,  [consult  index,  s.v.  '  Religion  ']. 

8  A  tedious  recital  of  the  long  and  painful  adventures  which  spirits 
were  supposed  to  pass  through  in  making  their  way  to  the  abode  of  Osiris. 

9  The  word  means  '  robber-kings.'  They  were  probably  a  coast  people, 
perhaps  Arabs.  See  Stern,  in  Deutsche  Revue,  Oct.,  1882.  He  regards 
them  as  having  been  Hamites,  '  like  the  Edomites,  Chorites  and  Canaan- 
ites,'  and  as  arriving  in  Egypt  about  2000  B.C.  They  were  barbarians,  and 
left  no  monuments.     Hence  our  ignorance  of  them. 


*  the  old  east  39 

§  8     The  New  Kingdom 

Rawlinson,  Man.,  68  sqq.    '  Egypt,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.     De  Lanoye,  Ramses  the  Great. 

The  Hycsos  expelled,1  national  life  and  culture  are 
speedily  and  splendidly  restored.  Gorgeous  buildings 
line  both  Nile  banks,  from  cataracts  to  sea.  Art  and 
industry  flourish.  Dynasty  xviii  introduces  and  crowns 
Egypt's  golden  age  —  at  home,  enlightened  civil  service, 
order,  progress;  abroad,  immense  and  unprecedented 
conquests.  Under  Tahout-mes2  III,  Egypt  is  arbiter 
of  the  world,  in  the  language  of  those  times,  'placing 
her  frontiers  where  she  pleases,'  —  sovereign  from  Cape 
Guardaf  ui 3  to  beyond  the  Euphrates,  and  in  the  ^Egean 
Islands.  Decline  and  temporary  anarchy4  mark  the 
transition  to  dynasty  xix,  not  yet,  however,  ending  the 
golden  age.  Present  knowledge  lessens  the  former  fame 
of  Ra-messou  II,  usually  called  'the  Great.'  Personally 
brave,  he  is  an  unwise  and  tyrannical  prince,  under 
whom  the  kingdom,  on  the  whole,  declines.5  Further 
decline  follows  ;  the  high  priest  of  Thebes  usurps  the 
throne ;  is  opposed,  at  last  successfully,  by  legitimists 
from  the  delta,  and  driven  to  Ethiopia,  where  he  founds 
a  kingdom.6  There  follows  a  period  of  alternate  Ethio- 
pian and  Assyrian  sway,  and  of  little,  rival  kings,  espe- 
cially in  the  delta.  A  partial  renaissance  comes  with 
dynasty  xxvi,  due  mainly  to  Grecian  immigration  and 
influence,  Psammeticus  and  Necho  II  being  its  main 
patrons.7  But  disaffection  on  the  part  of  the  national 
party,  and  a  vast  emigration  from  the  warrior  caste, 
prepare  victory  for  Cambyses. 

1  Native  kings  had  been  all  the  time  in  power,  especially  in  Upper  Eg., 
but  as  vassals  of  the  Hycsos.    There  were  no  horses  in  Egypt  till  the 


40  THE    OLD    EAST 

Hycsos;  the  cat  on  the  other  hand  originated  in  Egypt,  and  has  spread 
thence  over  all  the  earth.  Cf.  Kohl,  Ueber  die  Rolle  welche  Thiere  in 
Gesch.  gespielt  Aaben,  Vierteljahrsch.  f.  Volknvirtsckaft,  Bd.  I ;  Schlieben, 
Pferde  d.  Alterthums. 

2  Interesting  to  notice  that  his  great  power  was  built  up  for  him  by  a 
woman,  Hatasu,  his  elder  sister. 

3  The  name  '  Pount'  was  applied  by  the  Egyptians  to  Arabia,  with  the 
parts  of  Africa  about  the  Red  Sea  mouth.  The  word  seems  allied  with 
'  Poeni,'  '  Phoenicia,'  and  the  '  Phut '  or  ■  Put '  of  the  O.  T. 

4  Caused  by  the  apostacy  of  Amon-hotpou  IV  from  the  national  religion 
to  a  crude  form  of  theism,  which  he  appears  to  have  held  in  a  most  bigoted 
temper.  Lenormant  believes  that  his  change  was  due  to  Israelitish  influ- 
ence, and  proposes  to  identify  his  god,  *  Aten,'  with  the  Hebrew  '  Adonai.' 
His  mother  was  a  Semite.  Both  Ramessou  I  and  II  probably  had  Semitic 
blood  in  their  veins,  and  neither  was  sound  in  the  Egyptian  faith.  They 
worshipped  Soutech,  chief  god  of  the  Hycsos.  When  was  Israel  in  Egypt? 
The  best  evidence  places  Joseph's  promotion  under  Apophis,  one  of  the 
Hycsos  rulers;  the  persecution  under  Ramessou  II,  dynasty  xix,  and  the 
Exodus  under  Menephtah  II,  Ramessou's  fourteenth  son  and  next  suc- 
cessor. — '  Egypt,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.,  index,  s.v. '  Exodus.'  That  Ramessou  II, 
whose  mummy  was  unswathed  and  photographed  in  1 886,  was  the  Pharaoh 
who  put  to  death  the  Hebrews'  male  infants,  and  built  Pithom  with  Hebrew 
slave  labor,  has  been  conclusively  proved  by  M.  Naville's  recent  discoveries 
at  Pithom  itself.     See  his  Store  City  of  Pithom,  etc.  [Lond.,  1885]. 

6  Lenorm.,  Hist,  anc,  II,  286.  Ramessou,  or  Ramses,  II  is  the  Sesos- 
tris  of  Herodotus.  Three  steles  of  his  may  still  be  seen  cut  in  rock  near 
Beirut.  Stern  puts  the  beginning  of  Ramessou's  reign  between  1390  and 
1380.  Ramessou  III  ascended  the  throne  in  131 1,  which  may  be  taken  as 
the  first  absolutely  fixed  date  in  Egyptian  chronology.  It  is  fixed  by 
reckoning  from  the  conjunction  of  the  Sirius  year  with  the  vague  in  1322. 
See  §  4,  n.  6. 

6  Cf.  §  11,  n.  1. 

7  This  dynasty  began  in  648.  Necho  II  ruled  610-594.  It  was  he 
who  caused  Phoenician  sailors  to  circumnavigate  Africa,  who  attempted  a 
canal  between  Nile  and  Red  Sea,  and  who,  in  an  Asiatic  campaign,  was 
beaten  by  Nebuchadnezzar  at  Carchemish,  605.  His  victor  invaded  Egypt, 
but  soon  withdrew.  The  Egyptians,  like  the  Jews,  disliked  the  sea.  Hence 
the  welcome  extended  by  these  kings  to  Greeks  and  Phoenicians.  Priestly 
influence,  enforcing  passive  conformity,  contributed  to  the  decline  of 
national  spirit.  Cambyses'  conquest  was  easy  for  much  the  same  reason 
as  Wolseley's  in  1882. 


the  old  east  4 1 

§  9  Assyria  and  Babylon 

Duncker,  Bks.  II-IV.    Maspero,  139,  146  sqq.,  154  sqq.     Sayce,  Ancient  Empires,  ii. 
'  Babylonia,'  and  '  Persia,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.    Rawlinson,  Five  Great  Monarchies. 

Civilization  early 1  appears  in  the  great  basin  of  the 
Euphrates  and  Tigris,  its  bearer  being  a  people  of  mixed 
Turanian,  Hamitic  and  Semitic  stock,2  the  Semitic  soon 
preponderating.  Aside  from  the  Medo-Persian,  there 
were  here  four  immense  empires  in  succession,  the 
Elamite,  the  first  Chaldean,  the  Assyrian,  and  the  sec- 
ond Chaldean.  Separate  kings,  subject  to  Elam,  gov- 
erned in  Chaldea  till  about  1900,  when  one  of  them, 
Saryoukin,  or  Sargon,  conquered  most  of  the  others 
and  threw  off  the  Elamite  yoke.  This  king  furthered 
astronomy  and  literature,  founding  a  library.3  Semitic 
colonists  further  up  the  Tigris  founded  Assur  and 
Nineveh,  subsequently  Assyrian  capitals.  Babylon 
remaining  the  chief  mistress  of  culture,  Assyria  was 
successively  her  vassal,  peer,  and  suzerain.  Assyria  had 
a  far  greater  reach  in  both  space  and  time  than  either 
Chaldean  empire.  It  became  a  matter  of  course  that 
each  Assyrian  king  should  make  his  yearly  tour  of  bat- 
tles. The  history  embraces  three  separate  long  periods 
of  almost  world-wide  sway.  During  the  second,  coun- 
try eastward  nearly  to  the  Indus  was  conquered  ;  in  the 
third,  Egypt  to  its  utmost  bound.  The  broadest  empire 
was  under  the  greatest  king,  Assurbanipal.4  Babylon, 
after  long  effort  for  independence  with  only  rare  and 
temporary  successes,5  joins  Media  in  overthrowing  Nin- 
eveh and  Assyria.  The  independence  is  splendid  but 
brief.  In  little  more  than  a  century  Babylon  itself  suc- 
cumbs to  Cyrus  of  Persia. 


42  THE   OLD    EAST 

1  2300,  Elamite  power.  1900,  Saryoukin  of  Chaldea,  independent. 
1800,  Assyria  a  separate  principality.  1400,  Assyria  independent.  1270, 
Chaldea  subject  to  Assyria.  1020,  second  period  of  Assyrian  conquest 
begins.  745,  Touklat-habal-asar  [Tiglath-Pilezer]  II.  665,  Assurbanipal : 
Assyrian  empire  at  its  apogee.  606,  Nineveh  falls.  538,  Persians  take 
Babylon. 

2  The  primordial  civilization  here  was  Turanian,  its  bearers  the  Acca- 
dians,  occupying  Babylonia  to  about  as  far  south  as  the  junction  of  the 
Euphrates  and  Tigris.  Further  south  were  the  Sumirs,  while  northward, 
in  and  around  Assur,  which  they  had  built,  dwelt  the  rude  Semites,  who, 
mixing  with  the  Accadians  and  Sumirs,  produced  the  historic  civilization 
of  Assyria-Babylon.  The  Sumirs  seem  to  have  been  Hamitic,  yet  spoke  a 
tongue  related  to  Accadian  as  dialect  to  parent  language.  It  resulted 
that  Assyrian  speech  was  Semitic,  Assyrian  writing  Turanian.  On  these 
very  perplexing  relationships  see  Haupt,  Die  Akkadische  Sprache  [with 
Appendix],  Berlin,  1883.  Many  authors  consider  the  Sumirs  also  to  have 
been  Turanians. 

8  The  works  were  mathematical,  astronomical  and  philological.  Many 
of  them,  copied  at  a  later  period  by  order  of  Assurbanipal,  are  now  in  the 
British  Museum. 

4  Smith  [G.],  Hist,  of  Assurbanipal  [Lond.,  1871]  is  a  most  inter- 
esting interlinear  translation  of  the  cuneiform  records.  At  the  end  are 
some  valuable  remarks  by  Bosanquet  on  the  chronology  of  the  times  of 
this  great  king.  Assurbanipal  held  sway  over  nearly  the  entire  Semitic 
world.  His  reign  was  the  apogee  of  Semitism,  as  that  of  the  Egyptian 
Tahout-mes  III,  of  Hamitism. 

5  Babylonia  was  partly  independent  from  1 100  to  800.  During  some  of 
the  time  of  its  subjection  to  Assyria  it  was  not  merely  in  vassalage  but 
actually  incorporated.     • 

§  10    India 

Duttcker,  Bks.  V,  VI.  '  India,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.  Oldenberg,  Buddha.  Kaegi,  Rigveda. 
Rhys  Davids,  '  Buddhism,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.  Hunter,  '  India,'  ibid.  Collins  et  al., 
Buddhism  and  Christianity. 

Egypt  was  Hamitic,  Assyria  Semitic.  Persia,  of 
which,  as  less  significant  for  civilization,  our  brief  sur- 
vey forbids  the  canvass,  was  Aryan.1  The  oldest 
historic  Aryan  people  are  the  Hindoos.  They  have 
no   monuments   from   before    Buddha,    but    Rigvedic2 


THE    OLD    EAST  43 

representations,  reflecting  the  utmost  simplicity  of  man- 
ners as  well  as  scenery  from  the  Pendjab  3  and  indeed 
from  Central  Asia,  together  with  the  decaying  aspect  of 
the  civilization  when  Alexander  came,  refer  the  rise  of 
Hindoo  history  to  a  very  early  time.  After  pressing 
some  distance  down  the  Indus  the  people  divided  and 
one  part  crossed,  conquering,  to  the  Ganges.  The  west 
remained  the  chief  home  of  Vedic  conceptions ;  in  the 
east,  the  cradle  of  Buddhism,  these  were  never  rife. 
Of  Indian  history  before  Alexander  note  four  periods : 
i  Age  of  conquest  and  settlement,  represented  by  the 
great  national  epics,  the  MahabJiarata  and  the  Rama- 
jana.*  2  Growth-time  of  the  caste  system5  and  of 
Brahmanism  in  general,  represented  by  the  laws  of 
Manu.  Transition  to  this  period  registers  an  astound- 
ing  departure  of  the  people's  thought  and  life  from 
previous  simplicity.  The  period  presents  an  earlier, 
■  constructive  stage,  and  a  later,  that  of  the  Puranas? 
marked  by  moral  decadence,  and  the  rise  and  strife  of 
sects.  3  Epoch  of  Buddha  and  primitive  Buddhism. 
The  original  Buddhistic  preaching,  'human  equality, 
free  salvation,  enter  the  path' — earnest,  aggressive, 
pervasive  —  bade  fair  to  work  for  the  old  religion  total 
overthrow.7  4  Brahman istic  reaction.  Rock  temples8 
at  Ellora,  Salsetta,  Elephanta.  Buddhism,  stimulated 
by  persecution,  spread,  modified,  into  all  Eastern  Asia : 
Foism  in  China,  Lamaism  in  Thibet.9 

1  '  Aryan '  sa  '  the  excellent.'    Cf.  tipt\s,  ipurros  and  aper-fi- 

2  The  Rigveda  is  made  up  of  the  oldest  Indian  hymns.  They  are 
largely  of  a  religious  nature  yet  with  secular  elements.  Later,  complemen- 
tary collections,  similar  to  the  Rigveda,  were  the  Samaveda,  the  Jajurveda 
and  the  Atharvaveda.     Nearly  all  the  Sanscrit  literature  is  poetry. 


< 


44  THE   OLD    EAST 

3  The  *  five-river-land '  on  the  upper  waters  of  the  Indus.  See  map  of 
India.  They  must  have  arrived  here  from  beyond  the  Khyber  Pass  so 
early  as  between  4000  and  3000  B.C.  On  the  probable  earliest  home  of 
the  Aryans,  §  3,  n.  3. 

4  The  former  poem  relates  to  the  conquest  of  the  Ganges  Valley,  the 
latter  to  that  of  the  Deccan. 

5  Hunter,  as  above,  gives  the  best  brief  account  of  the  origin  of  caste : 
into  i)  priests,  ii)  warriors  and  iii)  serfs  [Sudras].  The  first  were  exalted 
by  the  sacredness  of  their  office;  the  last,  the  original  people  of  the  land, 
were  degraded  by  conquest. 

6  These  were  the  writings  of  the  various  sectaries.  Manu's  Code  was 
'  the  Bible  of  caste.' 

7  Buddha  renounced  nearly  every  article  of  Brahmanical  belief  and  de- 
manded of  his  disciples  almost  no  confession  of  faith.  His  creed  was :  no 
personal  God,  no  soul,  no  immortality  for  the  individual  consciousness, 
'  mortal  life  a  moan,  a  sigh,  a  sob,  a  storm,  a  strife,'  peace  to  be  had  solely 
in  total  self-renunciation.  He  enjoined  no  sacrifices  for  sin,  composed  no 
prayers  and  made  no  provision  for  religious  services  except  meetings  for 
confession  of  faults.  Buddhism  '  has  gained  more  disciples  than  any  other 
creed  in  the  world,  and,  after  a  lapse  of  24  centuries,  is  now  professed  by 
500  millions  of  people,  or  more  than  one-third  of  the  human  race.'  —  Hun- 
ter. On  the  Buddhist's  goal :  '  If  any  teach  Nirvana  is  to  cease,  say  unto 
such  they  lie.  If  any  teach  Nirvana  is  to  live,  say  unto  such  they  err, 
not  knowing  this.'    Light  of  Asia. 

8  It  was  the  Buddhist  pagodas,  so  popular,  that  first  led  the  Brahmans 
to  rear  these  temples.     Previously  they  had  no  religious  structures. 

8  See  'Lamaism'  and  'China,'  in  Encyc.  Brit. 


§   i i     Government 

Rawlinson,  Man.,  22  sqq.     Aristotle,  Politics,  V. 

In  Asia  as  in  Egypt  the  earliest  historical  civil  govern- 
ment is  despotic  monarchy.  As  yet,  no  dream  of  consti- 
tutional rule.1  To  the  last  in  India,  at  first  everywhere, 
kingdoms  are  small  and  separate.2  The  colossal  empires 
of  West  Asia  are  late,  evoked  partly  by  the  need  of 
opposing  Egypt.     In  these  —  prime  cause  of  their  insta- 


THE    OLD    EAST  45 

bility  —  so  lacking  is  Antiquity  in  all  thought  of  human 
unity3  that  no  effort  is  had  to  unify  subject  nationali- 
ties. Tribute  promptly  paid,  conquered  peoples  are  left 
entirely  to  themselves.  Even  under  the  satrap  system 
of  Darius  Hystaspes,  each  province  is  quite  free  to 
retain  its  own  speech,  religion,  laws,  customs.4  This 
policy  had  advantages.  It  brought  formal,  furthered 
real,  centralization.  On  the  other  hand,  it  promoted 
disloyalty  through  the  dangerous  scope  it  offered  to  the 
greed  of  satraps.  Co-ordinate  nations  too  lacked  mutual 
regard.  Each  viewed  itself  as  divine  in  origin,  others 
as  barbarians,  to  be  plundered,  enslaved  or  put  to  the 
sword,  as  it  might  list.5  In  international  spirit  and 
ideas  toward  constitutional  government  Phoenicia  took 
the  lead.6  The  noble  brotherly  love  of  Buddhism  little 
affected  politics.7 

1  The  Ethiopian  kingdom  mentioned  in  §  8  was  elective,  but  such  a 
monarchy  was  doubtless  as  little  constitutional  as  the  likewise  elective  one 
of  early  Rome. 

2  Phoenicia  is  rather  a  geographical  than  a  political  name.  Its  cities 
were  each  a  state.  Lenormant  understands  that  Egypt  regarded  Israel  its 
vassal  even  during  David's  and  Solomon's  reign. 

8  Remarkable,  however,  is  the  treaty  of  alliance,  commerce,  and  extra- 
dition, which  Ramessou  II  struck  with  the  Kheta  [Hittite]  king:  'If  an 
enemy  march  against  the  lands  of  the  great  king  of  Egypt  and  he  shall  send 
word  to  the  great  prince  of  Kheta,  Come,  bring  me  forces  against  them,  the 
great  prince  of  Kheta  shall  do  so  :  the  great  prince  of  Kheta  shall  destroy 
those  enemies.  If  the  great  prince  of  Kheta  prefer  not  to  come  in  person 
he  shall  send  archers  and  luar-chariots  to  destroy  them.''  Then  follows  a 
clause  promising  in  like  manner  Egypt's  aid,  in  case  of  need,  to  the  Kheta. 
Extradition  of  criminals  is  to  prevail,  also  of  all  other  fugitives,  though 
mere  self-expatriation  is  not  to  be  treated  as  a  crime.  —  Maspero,  223.  This 
is  the  world's  most  ancient  diplomatic  document,  and  one  of  the  most 
precious  historical  sources  which  all  antiquity  has  left  us.  Its  text  stands 
chiselled  in  the  Karnak  stones. 


46  THE    OLD    EAST 

4  Ravvlinson,  Man.,  90  sq. 

5  In  early  Latin  a  single  word  (hostis}  denoted  both  'stranger'  and 
•  enemy.'  The  Greeks  called  all  foreigners  '  barbarians.'  The  Egyptians 
applied  '  stupid '  in  the  same  way.  '  Aryans '  looked  upon  themselves  as 
4  the  excellent.'  The  Chinese  dubbed  their  empire  '  central '  and  '  celes- 
tial.' Israel  viewed  itself  as  the  elect  of  God.  The  very  word  '  slave,' 
which  acquired  its  modern  meaning  from  the  large  numbers  of  the  Slavic 
race  reduced  to  slavery,  originally  meant  '  glorious.' 

6  Carthage  was  an  aristocracy,  and  guarded  in  the  most  sedulous  man- 
ner against  a  dangerous  degree  of  individual  power.  It  brought  this  spirit 
from  Phoenicia,  yet  it  seems  that  the  little  confederated  city-states  here 
allowed  some  political  power  to  popular  assemblies.  Perhaps  the  geru- 
siasts  at  Carthage  too  were  popularly  elected.  —  Mommsen,  Rome,  II,  23 
sqq.  The  immediate  Phoenician  colonies  were  free,  but  not  those  of  Car- 
thage. —  Ranke,  Weltgesch,  Th.  I,  xii. 

7  Max  Miiller,  Buddhist  Charity,  No.  Am.  Rev.,  Vol.  140. 

§  12     Intelligence 

Kaegi,  Rigveda.     Lenormant,  II,  ii,  §§  2,  3;  iii,  §§  3,  5.    Max  Miiller,  Introd.  to 
Sacred  Books  of  the  East.     '  Records  of  the  Past.' 

The  intensive  intelligence  of  Antiquity  we  shall 
scarcely  overestimate.  Deep  philosophy  nearly  every- 
where underlies  the  popular  religion.1  Literature 
abounds,  in  India  early,  in  Egypt  very  early.  But  for 
the  frailty  of  the  tablets  bearing  it,  Assyrian  could 
hardly  be  less  voluminous.  Under  the  xiith  Egyptian 
dynasty  literature  is  a  profession  by  itself.2  Many 
pieces  out  of  these  primeval  letters  betray  keen  reflec- 
tion.3 The  proverbs  of  Papyrus  '  Prisse '  recall  Solo- 
mon's.4 Certain  Vedic  hymns  and  chapters  from  the 
Egyptian  classics  are  worthy  of  any  age.5  Egyptians 
and  Chaldeans  both  made  careful  astronomical  obser- 
vations, which  are  still  of  value.7  The  great  pyramids 
exactly  face  the  points  of  compass.  The  same  mathe- 
matical precision  marks  the  arrangement  of  Assyrian 


THE    OLD    EAST  47 

temples.  From  Assyria  has  come  the  oldest  human 
institution,  the  week,  with  its  days,  hours  and  min- 
utes.6 Chaldean  knowledge  of  square  numbers,7  frac- 
tional as  well  as  integral,  seems  to  be  older  than  Nine- 
veh. Chaldean  priests  understood  the  precession  of  the 
equinoxes  and  reckoned  it  with  great,  though  not  abso- 
lute, precision.  They  acquainted  India  with  grammar 
and  the  zodiac,  its  signs,  minutes  and  seconds ;  India 
them  with  algebra  and  the  decimal  notation.  Nearly 
all  the  fine  as  well  as  the  mechanic  arts  proceeded  from 
these  ancient  men,  and  in  some  of  them  they  produced 
effects  never  equalled  since.  China  discovered  gun- 
powder, the  compass,8  and  a  kind  of  printing  ;  India, 
steel-making  ;  Babylon,  enamelling  and  encaustic  paint- 
ing. Extensively,  intelligence  so  early  was  incompa- 
rably inferior  to  modern,  yet  it  was  considerably  diffused. 

1  See  §  16. 

2  See  §  15,  n.  I.  Doubtless  many  Assyrian  records  have  perished  with 
the  artificial  stone  on  which  they  were  written. 

8  '  A  good  man  is  not  envious,  but  well  disposed  to  another  even  while 
ill-treated  by  him;  like  the  sandal-tree,  which,  even  when  felling,  imparts 
to  the  axe  its  aroma.'  —  Hindoo  poem.  •  Let  not  sin  after  sin,  hard  to  con- 
quer, overcome  us.  Let  sin  and  lust  depart.'  —  Rigveda.  '  The  rebellious 
sees  knowledge  in  ignorance,  virtues  in  vices ;  what  sages  know  to  be  death, 
that  to  him  is  life  day  by  day.'     Papyrus  Prisse. 

4  '  Good  luck  makes  every  place  good ;  a  little  check  may  suffice  to  cast 
down  a  very  great  man.  Felicitous  speech  excels  for  lustre  the  emerald 
that  slaves'  hands  find  among  pebbles.  The  wise  man  receives  satisfaction 
from  what  he  knows;  his  heart  is  in  the  right  place,  pleasant  are  his  lips.' 
Papyrus  Prisse,  oldest  part.  Cf.  last  n.;  Lenorm.,  Hist,  anc,  II,  ii,  2  and  3; 
Mahaffy,  Prolegomena,  Pt.  ii. 

5  For  point,  sense  or  even  beauty,  nothing  yet  translated  from  the 
Vedas  can  compare  with  our  best  pieces  from  Old  Egypt. 

6  Sixty  was  a  favorite  factor  and  divisor  with  these  priests,  for  the  rea- 
son, Max  Muller  thinks,  that  it  is  the  greatest  multiple-number.     How 


48 


THE    OLD    EAST 


permanent !     '  The  French  Revolution  destroyed  all  else  but  the  dials  of 
our  watches.' 

7  Here  is  a  copy,  in  Arabic  figures,  of  a  table  which  Loftus  found  at 
Senkereh  in  1 854 :  — 


SQUARES. 

■  SOSSES. 

UNITS. 

SQUARES. 

'  SOSSES. 

UNITS. 

51'2       = 

=       43 

+ 

21 

562         : 

=            52 

+ 

16 

522          = 

-       45 

+ 

4 

sf    -- 

=       54 

+ 

9 

532      = 

a       46 

+ 

49 

5»2      - 

=       56 

+ 

4 

54*      = 

=       48 

+ 

36 

592      * 

=       58 

+ 

I 

552      s 

=       5° 

4- 

25 

602      = 

60 

A  'soss'  was  60  units.  The  table  reads:  the  square  of  51  is  equal  to 
43'sosses'  [43  times  60]  plus  21  units,  etc.  'Quite  similar  tables  exist 
upon  the  times  for  the  rising  of  Venus,  Jupiter  and  Mars,  as  well  as  cal- 
endars of  the  phases  of  the  moon  from  day  to  day  for  the  entire  month. 
They  had  determined  the  moon's  mean  daily  course,  and  succeeded,  by 
knowledge  of  a  continuous  series  of  223  of  its  changes,  in  predicting  its 
eclipses.  The  earliest  which  we  know  to  have  been  computed  by  them  is 
that  of  March  30,  721  B.C.,  and  their  reckoning  varies  but  a  few  minutes 
from  ours.  Sun-eclipses  they  did  not  predict  but  most  carefully  observed, 
e.g.,  those  of  July  2,  930,  and  July  13,  809,  B.C.'  —  Murdter,  Gesch.  Baby- 
loniens  u.  Assyriens.  They  knew  and  reduced  to  practice  one  of  the  chief 
elements  of  the  metric  system,  —  that  of  deriving  all  measures  of  length, 
superficies,  solids  and  weight  to  one  and  the  same  linear  unit.  Mommsen, 
Rome,  I,  273,  is  of  opinion  that  the  Babylonian  blending  of  the  duodeci- 
mal and  the  decimal  notation  arose  from  notice  of  solar  along  with  lunar 
months.  Ten  solar  cycles  would  nearly  equal  twelve  lunar.  Geometry  of 
a  primitive  kind  was  familiar  to  the  Egyptians.     Also  see  §  4,  n.  6. 

8  See  Humboldt,  Cosmos,  Vol.  II,  for  the  main  facts  in  the  h.  of  the 
compass.  The  oldest  bridge  of  which  there  is  record  spanned  the  Euphra- 
tes at  Babyl  )n.    The  Egyptians  were  great  in  anatomy  and  medicine. 


the  old  east  49 

§  13     Writing 

Masfero,  ch.  xv.  Tylor,  Anthrop.,  ch.  vii.  'Hieroglyphics'  in  Encyc.  Brit.  Carl 
Abel,  Linguistic  Essays,  ix  and  x.  Isaac  Taylor,  The  Alphabet.  Mahaffy,  Proleg., 
103  sqq. 

Writing  everywhere  began  with  pictures.1  Its  stages 
were,  (i)  ideography  direct,  (2)  ideography2  symbolic, 
(3)  phonography  syllabic,  (4)  phonography  alphabetic, 
alphabetic  writing  as  we  have  it  now.  Ideographic 
symbols  are  either  simple  or  complex.  The  simple 
may  be  formed  through  synecdoche,  metonymy,  meta- 
phor or  enigma.  Complex  are  combinations  of  simple. 
Ideography  was  a  very  inadequate  means  of  expressing 
thought.  Syllabic  phonography  arose  through  associat- 
ing the  ideogram  with  the  sound,  or  congeries  of  sounds, 
constituting  the  name  of  its  object.3  Ideographic  values 
of  characters  passed  into  sound-values.  With  monosyl- 
labic languages  this  ended  the  process,  but  some  polysyl- 
labic ones  found  means  to  represent  each  several  syllable 
by  itself.  This  was  effected  by  attaching  the  character 
for  a  whole  word  to  its  first  syllable  alone.  The  Assy- 
rian cuneiform  script  represents  this  syllabic  stage.  The 
next  step  consisted  in  decomposing  syllables  and  find- 
ing signs  for  each  vowel  and  consonant.  The  Egyptian 
writing  —  hieroglyphic,  hieratic,  or  demotic,  according  as 
it  was  less  or  more  cursive  and  abridged  —  employed 
together  ideograms,  and  both  syllabic  and  alphabetic 
phonograms.  The  Phoenicians  perfected  rather  than 
invented  alphabetic  writing,  as  their  alphabet  was  de- 
rived from  the  cursive  Egyptian.*  From  the  Phoenician 
have  sprung  all  the  other  alphabets  in  the  world.5 

1  True  of  the  German  runes,  which  at  first  were  not  letters  at  all. 

2  Ideography  direct  would  be  illustrated  by  writing  the  picture  of  an 


50  THE    OLD    EAST 

ox  for  the  idea  of  ox;  id.  symbolic  by  using  the  same  picture,  or  the 
picture  of  an  elephant,  to  denote  strength.  This  would  also  illustrate  the 
tnetonymic  formation  of  simple  symbols,  as  would  also  any  picturing  of 
cause  for  effect :  the  sun  or  a  lamp,  for  light,  etc.  Synecdoche  presents  a 
part  for  the  whole,  as  the  head  for  the  entire  animal.  Metaphor  is  used 
when  the  figure  of  an  eagle  is  sketched  to  denote  royalty.  Enigma  is  the 
same  as  metaphor,  save  that  the  resemblance,  instead  of  being  natural, 
subsists  only  in  and  through  some  mystic  Egyptian  belief. 

8  In  phonography  the  mind  leaves  out  of  account  the  thing  represented 
by  the  sign,  passing  directly,  through  association,  from  sign  to  sound,  a 
process  which  rebus  poorly  imitates.  So  far  the  Egyptians  had  gone.  The 
Phoenicians  went  further,  and  [e.g.]  instead  of  sketching  a  donkey  or 
donkey's  head  or  ear  to  spell  '  donkey,'  used  some  one  of  these  signs  to 
spell  '  don,'  and  [we  will  say]  the  picture  of  a  key  for  the  other  syllable, 
'key.'  Alphabetic  writing  was  reached  when  the  first  sign  had  become 
still  further  specialized  so  as  to  signify  only  '  d,'  other  signs  being  used  for 
'  o'  and  the  remaining  letters.  Cuneiform  writing  would  seem  to  have 
been  an  invention  hardly  less  wonderful,  so  early,  than  alphabetic.  See 
Schrader,  Keilinschriften  u.  d.  Alte  Testament,  in  which  Professor  Haupt 
has  an  excursus  on  the  cuneiform  story  of  the  deluge. 

4  Probably  through  the  Hycsos.  See  §  7,  n.  9.  The  Semites  did  not 
introduce  vowels.  This  was  done  independently  of  one  another  by  the 
Greeks  and  the  Hindoos.  '  In  every  letter  we  trace  lies  the  mummy  of  an 
Egyptian  hieroglyphic' 

6  On  derivation  of  the  alphabets  of  India  from  Babylon,  Burnell,  in 
Academy,  June  17,  1882.  Writing  from  right  to  left,  as  in  Hebrew,  is  not 
the  oldest  fashion.  The  Papyrus  Prisse  reads  as  English,  which  seems  to 
have  been  the  earliest,  yielding  here  and  there  to  the  '  boustrophedon ' 
form,  from  right  to  left  and  then  back,  as  in  ploughing,  the  left-handed 
being  a  remnant  of  this. 

§  14    Art 

Perrot  and  Chipiez,  Ancient  Art.     Winckelmann,  do.     Rawlinson,  Man.,  27  sqq. 
Rassam,  Babylonian  Cities.    Mitchell,  Anc.  Sculpture,  i-viii. 

Ancient  art  had  four  independent  centres1  of  origi- 
nation, Egypt,  Chaldea,  India,  and  China.  Chinese 
art  is  ancient  but  unimportant.  Hindoo,  consisting 
of  architecture  only,  arose  later  and  was  remarkable 


THE    OLD    EAST  5 I 

merely  for  the  bizarre  and  gigantic  character  of  its 
products.2  Egyptian  art,  existing  only  to  serve  religion, 
not  for  its  own  sake,  could  not  attain  modern  measures 
of  perfection.  Here,  as  in  all  the  most  ancient  seats  of 
art,  painting  and  sculpture  were  subordinate  to  archi 
tecture.  Mechanical  details  had  been  thoroughly  mas 
tered,  as  appears  from  the  number  and  the  good  preser- 
vation of  remains.  Colors  are  bright  and  pillars  solid 
after  fifty  centuries.  There  were  two  periods,  a  realistic, 
and  a  later  one  in  which  art  wrought  with  canons  and 
models  of  its  own.3  The  thoughts  of  immensity  and 
repose  rule  in  both.  Chaldean  art  is  more  practical.4 
As  to  architecture,  note  the  materials,5  the  terrace,  the 
story-tower.  The  Assyrians  prosecuted  painting  but 
little,6  and  chiefly  to  aid  the  relief  of  statues.  In 
encaustic  painting  the  Babylonians  greatly  excelled. 
In  sculpture  alone  did  Assyria  surpass  Babylon.  The 
Assyrian  sculptors  were  realists,  'the  Dutchmen  of 
antiquity.'  In  reproducing  inanimate  forms  they  have 
never  been  outdone,  in  that  of  animal,  hardly  equalled. 
In  perspective  they  failed,  unwilling  to  sacrifice  any 
one  projection  to  another.  To  the  genius  of  Assyrian 
engravers  in  stone  we  are  indebted  for  the  preservation 
of  the  people's  literature.  The  Persians,  like  the  Jews 
and  Phoenicians,  copied  Assyrian  sculpture,  as  they  did 
Assyrian  writing.  Persian  architecture  imitated  the 
Hindoo  more. 

1  On  the  derivation  of  classical  art  from  the  East,  see  §  19. 

2  But  wood-carving  early  attained  excellence  in  both  China  and  India. 
The  Hindoos,  one  has  said,  had  no  genius  but  patience.  Equally  true  of 
the  Chinese. 

8  The  naturalistic  period  was  under  the  Old  Kingdom,  the  independent 


52  THE    OLD    EAST 

development  under  the  New.  In  this,  extraordinary  skill  was  attained  in 
subordinating  the  natural  in  animal  forms  to  the  ideal.  The  lions  from 
Gebel  Barkal  in  the  British  Museum  are  thought  to  be  the  finest  extant 
examples  of  the  idealization  of  animal  forms. 

4  The  greatest  structures  in  the  Euphrates  Valley  were  for  defence,  like 
city  walls  of  colossal  height  and  width,  or  for  aid  in  observing  the  heavens, 
as  the  terraces  and  those  towers  with  several  stories  each.  Alexander 
found  at  Babylon  a  Belus-temple,  eight  stories  high.  The  oldest  Egyptian 
writing  is  a  tribute  of  homage  to  the  immortal  soul;  one  of  the  oldest 
cuneiform  documents  is  a  business  contract.  Walls  of  Assyrian  buildings 
were  thick  but  hollow,  serving  economy  and  guarding  admirably  against 
extremes  of  heat  and  cold. 

6  Brick  or  artificial  stone,  sun-dried  or  burned.  From  Nineveh  south- 
ward the  land  contained  no  natural  stone.  The  Babylonian  bricks  were 
far  superior  to  the  Assyrian.  Each  brick  had  on  its  under  side  as  laid 
in  the  wall  a  legend,  which,  in  public  buildings,  contained  the  name  of 
the  king  reigning  at  the  time  of  construction.  If  all  the  bricks  in  a  dis- 
covered wall  bear  the  same  legend,  the  wall  is  known  to  be  original,  not 
made  of  bricks  from  an  earlier  time.  Some  pillars  and  roofs  were  of  wood, 
but  the  Mesopotamians  knew  and  used  the  principles  of  vaulting  and 
arching.  Wooden  pillars  were  occasionally  gilded  or  silvered.  Assyrian 
art-development  was  at  its  finest  in  the  7th  century  B.C.,  under  Sargon, 
Sennacherib  and  Sardanapalus  VI. 

6  Painting  is  the  department  of  antique  art  of  which  our  knowledge  is 
most  defective. 

§  15     Industrial  Condition 

Huet,  Commerce  et  Navigation  des  ancient,  i-xv.    Raiulinson,  Man.,  29  sqq.,  80  sqq. 
Grote,  II,  xix.     Osgood,  Prehistoric  Commerce,  Baptist  Quar.  Rev.,  1885. 

By  B.C.  1000  in  all  the  great  centres  of  civilization, 
in  Egypt 1  far  earlier,  society  was  thoroughly  organized 
industrially.  Wealth  and  luxury  abounded.  Division 
of  labor  prevailed.  Agriculture  and  the  industrial  arts 
were  everywhere  extremely  well  advanced.  Egypt  and 
Babylonia  contained  each  an  elaborate  system  of  canals 
for  irrigation.  Weaving,  iron-working  and  most  other 
ordinary  forms  of  skilled  labor  were  carried  on  in  all 


THE    OLD    EAST  53 

civilized  lands.2  Commerce  thrived.  Babylon  was  a 
city  of  merchants.3  Phoenician  sails  whitened  the  Per- 
sian Gulf,  the  Red  Sea,  the  Mediterranean,  and  even 
the  Atlantic  coasts  of  Africa  and  Europe.4  Tin  from 
Cornwall  and  the  Scilly  Isles  was  exchanged  for  the 
gold  of  Ophir  and  the  silks  of  India.  Immense  cara- 
vans for  inland  commerce  connected  the  Mediterranean 
with  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris,  and  these  with  the 
Indus  5  and  with  China.  Yet  in  spite  of  this  enormous 
productive  activity,  the  bulk  of  the  population,  immense 
in  each  land,  was  in  deep  poverty,  caused  partly  by 
tyranny,  partly  by  ignorance  and  disregard  of  economic 
laws.  Eminent  evils  economically  were  (i)  slavery, 
(2)  caste,  (3)  the  idleness  and  prodigality  of  the  upper 
classes,  (4)  wars,  gigantic,  perpetual,  truceless,  annihi- 
lating capital  as  well  as  men. 

1  See  Lenorm.,  II,  123  sqq.,  also  Maspero,  123,  for  the  document  from 
the  time  of  dynasty  xii,  wherein  a  scribe,  urging  his  son  to  take  up  the  same 
calling,  enumerates  the  infelicities  attaching  to  each  of  the  several  trades. 

3  See  §  12.  It  is  believed  that  the  Egyptian  linen-manufacture  has 
for  quality  never  been  surpassed. 

3  Curious  and  useful  animals  were  imported  thither  from  the  remotest 
lands.  Both  silver  and  gold  were  used  as  money,  at  the  value-relation  of 
13  or  13-5  to  1.  The  Chaldean  account  of  the  flood  calls  the  ark  a  ship 
and  gives  it  a  pilot. 

4  So  far  as  known  only  Phoenician  or  Carthaginian  ships  visited  the 
Scilly  Islands,  but  the  Greeks  of  Marseilles  obtained  tin  thence  overland. 
The  Phoenicians  had  founded  Gades  [modern  Cadiz]  before  the  dawn  of 
Greek  history.  The  plants  for  the  incense  so  common  in  Egypt  must  have 
come  from  as  far  at  least  as  the  mouth  of  the  Red  Sea.  Also  the  cassia, 
cinnamon  and  sweet  calamus  required  for  the  holy  anointing  oil  of  the 
Mosaic  law  [Exodus  xxx]  were  not  obtainable  nearer  than  Ceylon  or  India- 
—  Osgood. 

5  Either  northward,  by  the  Khyber  Pass,  or  southward,  by  the  Bolan. 
The  route  to  China  left  Northern  Persia.     All  along  this,  and  westward, 


54  THE   OLD   EAST 

south  of  the  Caspian  and  Black  Seas  even  to  the  extreme  west  of  Europe 
have  been  found  antique  specimens  of  jade,  which  must  have  come  in 
prehistoric  times  from  China  or  Burma,  where  are  the  only  known  mines 
of  this  stone  in  the  world.  —  Osgood.  The  Old  Persians  were  the  first  to 
use  a  postal  or  a  telegraph  [by  signs]  system.  They  also  had  topographi- 
cal maps  and  magnificent  roads,  with  sign-posts  and  wayside  inns. 

§  \6    Religion 

Monier  Williams,  Relig.  of  Zoroaster,  Nineteenth  Century,  Vol.  IX.  Hoare,  Relig.  of 
Anc.  Egyptians,  ibid.,  Vol.  IV.  '  Religions,'  in  Encyc.  Brit,  [names  the  best  litera- 
ture]. Rawlinson,  Religions  of  the  Ancient  World.  Caird,  Faiths  of  the  World. 
Rhys  Davids,  Origin  and  Development  of  Religious  Belief.    Keary,  Primitive  Belief. 

Asia  is  trie  land  of  religion,  as  Europe  of  politics. 
All  antiquity  save  China  was  priest-ridden.     Learning 
was   a   purely   priestly   affair.      Nearly   every   ancient 
religion  was  a  popular  polytheism  with  an  underlying 
monism,1  either  theistic  or  atheistic.     Thoughtful  per-* 
sons  conceived  sun,  animal  or  idol,  as  a  mere  symbol  or 
manifestation  of  Deity,    the   ignorant  as  Deity  itself.' 
The  most   common   such   symbol  was   the   sun,2    and 
worship  of  the  sun,  or  of  light,  was  almost  universal. 
Coupled  with  the  sun-god  was  usually  some  deification 
of   the   renewing,  generating,    fructifying   principle   in 
nature.     The  world  was  expounded  more  as  an  emana- . 
tion  than  as  a  creation  proper.3    The  tendency  was  to 
separate  religion  from  morality.     Zoroastrianism,  often 
considered   a   dualistic   system,  was   in   fact   the    best  i 
heathen  specimen  of  theistic  monism,4  as  Buddhism  was 
of  atheistic.     Zoroaster,  thinking  of  God  as  Light,  is 
naturally  an  optimist ;  Buddha,  judging  the  First  Cause   , 
to  be  unknowable  and  dark,  cannot  but  champion  pessi 
mism.5     Confucianism,  more  ethical  than  theological, 
declares  for  neither  of  these  views ;   the  Egyptian  reli-   - 
gion  in  different  species  of  its  utterances,  for  both.6 


THE    OLD    EAST  55 

1  Monism  is  any  doctrine  which  derives  the  world  ultimately  from  some 
single  principle. 

2  See  '  Religions  '  in  Encyc.  Brit. 

3  I.e.,  a  creation  out  of  nothing.  Note  the  difference  between  the  idea 
of  emanation,  lower  forms  of  being  ever  proceeding  from  higher,  and  the 
modern  notion  of  evolution,  according  to  which  higher  forms  issue  from 
lower. 

4  The  evil  principle  was  not  conceived  as  coeternal  with  the  good. 

5  Ultimate  being,  the  causa  sui  and  the  first  cause  of  all  other  being, 
must  inevitably  furnish  the  standard  for  judging  the  worth  of  all  finite 
existences.  If  spirit,  consciousness,  personality,  is  regarded  as  first  cause, 
then  life,  the  increase  of  our  powers,  our  development  in  reason,  will 
seem  good  and  desirable.  If  on  the  contrary  the  central  essence  of  the 
universe  is  unconscious,  thought-life  and  the  growth  of  personality  in  gen- 
eral cannot  but  appear  evil  and  deplorable. 

6  Monotheism  and  belief  in  immortality  were  basal  elements  in  the 
Egyptian  faith,  both  clearly  visible  already  in  the '  Prisse ' ;  but  the  Egyptian 
animal-cult  and  deep  regard  for  the  human  body  most  naturally  connect 
themselves  with  the  East-Asiatic  view  that  normal  being  is  the  reverse  of 
spiritual.  Cats,  dogs,  cows,  crocodiles  and  other  animals  were  worshipped. 
Herodotus  declares  that  at  a  fire  the  Egyptians  were  more  anxious  to  save 
the  cats  than  to  quench  the  flames.  He  takes  [II,  123]  belief  in  immor- 
tality and  in  transmigration  to  have  originated  in  Egypt. 

§  17    The  Mosaic  Faith 

Isaiah,  ch.  xli,  xliv.    Psalm  cxv.    Jeremiah,  x.    Old  Testament,  passim. 
Lotze,  Mik.,  VII,  v. 

With  all  contemporary  religions,  that  of  Israel  stood 
in  marvellous  contrast,  —  spiritual,  yet  exoteric  and  pop- 
ular. Here,  by  the  eighth  century  B.C.,  common  people 
are  emphatic  monotheists,  and  their  faith  tolerates  no 
pantheistic  or  polytheistic  phasis.1  Theirs  is  one  God 
at  surface  as  at  basis,  a  spirit,  free  from  subdivision, 
sex,  or  confusion  with  his  universe.  Idols  cannot  help 
men  conceive  him.  Nature  is  his  work,  through  crea- 
tion, not  emanation ;  its  laws,  forms  of  his  eternal  voli- 


56  THE   OLD    EAST 

tion.  The  thunder  is  his  voice,  the  sunshine  his  smile, 
the  hail-storm  the  stroke  of  his  awful  rod  ;  but  these 
never  assume  independent  potency.  Jehovah  has  no 
second,  has  no  equal.     He  is  personal,  moral,  knowable. 

1  Clouds  and  darkness '  are  '  round  about  him,'  but  '  he 
clothes  himself  with  light,'  and  'justice  and  judgment 
are  the  habitation  of  his  throne.'  Thus  the  religion  is 
ethical  and  optimistic,  and  contains  the  germ  of  a  rational 
doctrine  of  immortality.2 

1  That  the  oldest  parts  of  the  Old  Testament  contain  forms  of  expres- 
sion indicative  of  the  lingering  influence  of  nature-religion,  even  increases 
our  wonder  at  the  perfect  monotheism  of  the  prophets.  Cf.  Duhm,  Theo- 
legie  der  Propheten. 

*  All  this  in  the  way  indicated  at  last  §,  n.  5. 

§  18     Morality 

Hegel,  Philos.  of  Hist.,  117  sqq.,  154  sqq.    Flint,  do.,  in  France  and  Germany,  Imt. 
Lenormant,  praef.  to  Hist.  anc. 

I  A  generic,  vital  defect  in  ancient  morality  was  its 
external,  mechanical  character.  Instead  of  being  cog- 
nized and  obeyed  as  rational,  moral  law  was  viewed  as  be- 
ing merely  imposed  upon  the  agent  by  foreign  authority.1 
Herein  Buddhism  is  no  exception,  the  '  peace  '  it  pro- 
claimed having  nowise  the  character  of  moral  Tightness.2 

2  Another  lack  was  non-recognition  of  mankind's  unity.3 
Hence,  (a)  caste  :  in  India  an  iron  system,  in  Egypt  less 
rigid,  elsewhere  only  incipient,  (b)  terrible  cruelty  in 
war  and  toward  slaves  and  prisoners.  In  this  the 
Assyrians  were  the  worst.  On  the  contrary,  early 
Buddhism,  to  which  all  praise,  antagonized  this  entire 
spirit  of  caste  and  separateness.  3  Non-belief  in  human 
unity  forbade  the  thought  of  human  progress,  which  was 


THE   OLD   EAST  57 

also,  like  optimism  at  large,  hindered  by  dimness  in  the 
conception  of  divine  unity.4  Man  perfectible,  history 
purposive,  humanity  a  single  thing  including  all  epochs, 
races,  and  classes,  —  such  ideas  were  wholly  unknown 
to  paganism,  and  are  due  almost  solely  to  the  gospel. 
4  Antiquity  failed  to  regard  the  human  individual  as  of 
independent  worth.  Hence  polygamy,  low  estimate  of 
woman,  infanticide,  prodigious  slaughter  in  wars  and 
the  oppression  and  passivity  of  the  multitude.  In  the 
old  Orient,  literature  has  no  word  of  freedom,  life  little 
moral  heroism  or  struggle. 

1  Lotze,  Mik.,  VII,  v.  Max  Miiller,  Contemp.  Rev.,  November,  1882, 
defends  the  Hindoos  as  truthful,  much  as  has  been  alleged  to  the  contrary. 

2  See  C.  H.  Dall,  Unitarian  Rev.,  1882. 

8  Lotze,  Mik.,  VII,  iv.  The  thought  of  two  radically  different  kinds  of 
men,  <pvx>-Koi  and  irvev/xariKoi,  which  figures  so  largely  in  Gnostic  and  even 
Christian  Alexandrian  writings,  seems  to  have  been  the  residuum  of  Egyp- 
tian caste-sentiment. 

4  So  far  as  belief  in  a  single  Supreme  Being  was  wanting,  unity  would 
not  be  assigned  to  the  world  or  to  mankind;  and  belief  in  progress  for  the 
genus  could  not  possibly  arise  while  the  universe  was  thought  of  as  mani- 
fold, or  men  as  constituting  various  kinds. 

§  19    Contribution  to  the  West 

Grote,  Pt.  II,  ii,  III,  xxi.  Curtius,  I,  ii.  Zeller,  Greek  Philos.,  Int.,  ch.  ii.  K.  F. 
Herrmann,  Kulturgesch.  d.  Gricchen  11.  Router,  39  sqq.  Milchhofer,  Anfdnge 
d.  Kunst  in  Griechenland.    Max  Miiller,  Contemp.  Rev.,  Oct.,  188*. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  East  must  have  been  to  a  great 
extent  the  instructor  of  Greece  and  Rome.1  Such  in- 
fluence would  naturally  be  in  the  main  impalpable,  leav- 
ing no  registry  in  specific  institutions.  Yet  much  that 
is  specific  can  be  traced,  especially  at  two  periods,  the 
beginning  and  the  close  of  Greek  life.  Old  Attic  reli- 
gion and  social  structure  show  Egyptian  traits.     The 


58  THE   OLD    EAST 

Grecian  calendar  was  of  Egyptian  origin.  Pythagoras, 
Thales,  Solon,  Democritus  and  Plato  learned  of  Egyp- 
tian priests.2  The  earliest  Greek  coins  were  Lydian,3 
weights  and  measures  Babylonian.  The  Greeks  became 
acquainted  with  navigation,  also  with  several  of  their 
deities,  from  the  Phoenicians.4  Still  another  source  of 
their  religion  was  Phrygia,  whose  language  too,  greatly 
resembled  Greek.  The  alphabets  of  the  Greeks  and  of 
the  Italian  peoples  originated  in  the  Phoenician,  their 
art  in  the  Assyrian.  'The  Assyrian  influence  spread 
throughout  Asia  Minor,  the  Mediterranean  Isles  and 
Greece.  The  first  Greek  sculpture  received  its  inspira-v^ 
tion,  precepts  and  models  from  the  Assyrian  school.  \/ 
Through  colonists  and  commerce  the  same  tradition 
passed  from  Asia  Minor,  Phoenicia  and  Carthage  into 

\  Italy,  where  it  served  as  basis  for  the  development  of 
the  Etruscan  civilization,  which  furnished  to  that  of 
Rome  the  elements  of  its  primitive  grandeur.'5     As  to 

'  the  second  of  the  periods  named,  all  later  Greek  phil- 
osophy had  a  distinct  oriental  cast.6  New-Platonism 
originated  in  Alexandria,  under  Asiatic  influence,  and 
was  more  than  a  century  old  before  it  flourished  at 
Athens. 

1  This  in  no  sense  compromises  Greek  originality.  '  It  is  no  less  a  fact  of 
history  that  the  Greeks  derived  conceptions  from  India,  Syria  and  Egypt 
than  that  the  Greek  conceptions  are  peculiar  to  themselves  and  those  others 
alien.'  —  Hegel.  The  greatest  mere  classical  historians  slight  the  East, 
needing  to  be  corrected  by  Duncker  and  Lenormant.  At  this  point  Grote 
can  learn  from  Thirlwall.  Thiersch,  Epochen  d.  bildenden  Kunst  unter  den 
Griechen,  1816  sqq.,  argued  strongest  for  Egyptian  and  Phoenician  inf.  on 
early  Greek  art;  K.  O.  Miiller,  Handb.  d.  Archaeologie,  strongest  against. 
The  text  might  also  mention  the  historical,  geographical,  ethnological  and 
other  knowledge  which  came  to  Greece  in  conseq.  of  Alexander's  cam- 
paigns, and  so  enriches  Aristotle's  writings. 


THE   OLD    EAST  59 

8  Democritus  and  Plato  probably  visited  Egypt;  perhaps  Pythagoras 
too,  but  this  is  more  doubtful.  Plato  learned  much  there,  but  his  myths 
rather  than  his  philosophy.  Curtius  agrees  with  Grote  in  somewhat  mini- 
mizing Egyptian  influence  in  Greece,  neither  one  basing  aught  upon  the 
traditions  touching  Cecrops  and  Danaus,  or  upon  the  statements  of  Herod- 
otus II,  identifying  Demeter  with  Isis,  and  so  on.  Little  as  we  can  im- 
plicitly trust  Herodotus  when  off  the  track  of  his  personal  explorations, 
the  advance  of  Egyptology  renders  most  of  his  representations  in  this 
matter  increasingly  credible.  Cf.  §  3.  For  latest  criticism  of  Herodotus, 
Sayce,  pref.  to  Anc't  Empires  of  East.  There  was  virtual  caste  in  early 
Athens.  —  Rawlinson,  Man.,  120.  Athena  and  Neith  were  perhaps  the 
same.  Notice  that  Eastern  Greece  had  the  earliest  and  always  the  richest 
civilization. 

3  Lydia  and  Persia  alone  among  nations  west  of  the  Indus  coined 
money  in  high  antiquity.  They  applied  Babylonian  monetary  ideas.  In 
the  talent  of  60  minae  and  the  mina  of  60  shekels  we  see  the  Babylonian 
sexagesimal  principle.  The  shekel  was,  in  Greek,  the  stater  or  the  Daric. 
The  word  '  mna '  is  of  Chaldean  origin.  Through  Pheidon  of  Argos,  who 
introduced  weights  and  measures  in  Greece  and  was  the  first  Greek  to  coin 
money,  this  Asiatic  norm  of  weights  and  measures  passed  to  Greece,  known 
there  as  the  Eginetan,  because  the  earliest  Greek  coins  were  struck  in 
Egina.  The  Eubcean  system,  prevalent  in  Athens  and  the  Ionian  cities, 
was  made  up  in  the  same  way  as  the  Eginetan.  Both  were  in  use  in 
the  Persian  Empire,  as  well  as  in  Greece.  .Eginetan  measures  were  to 
Eubcean  or  old  Attic  as  6  to  5,  to  Solon's  or  later  Attic  as  5  to  3.  — 
Boeckh,  Metrologische  Untersuchungen.  Pheidon  usurped  the  presidency 
of  the  Olympian  games  in  the  28th  Olympiad,  not  in  the  8th,  as  Pausanias, 
VI,  22,  2,  has  till  recently  been  read.  He  must  have  flourished  about 
700-660  B.C. 

4  Aphrodite,  Artemis,  Poseidon,  also  Heracles.  Melcart,  god  of  Tyre, 
is  Melicertes  [Palaemon],  deified  on  the  Corinthian  Isthmus.  He  was  son 
of  Ino,  daughter  of  Cadmus,  the  bringer  of  letters  to  Greece. 

5  Lenormant.  Cf.  Grote  III,  xix;  Mommsen,  I,  xv.  Thus  are  to  be 
explained  those  monuments  and  that  luxury  and  wealth  of  the  Etruscan 
cities  which  so  long  whetted  the  fierce  greed  of  the  Romans.  The  very 
name  '  Italy '  is  probably  Phoenician,  as  is  '  Salamis,'  founded  by  Phoe- 
nicians. The  Romans  learned  arching  and  vaulting  from  the  Etruscans, v' 
who  probably  derived  them  from  Egypt  through  Phoenicia  and  Carthage. 
Mommsen,  however,  traces  them  from  Italy  to  Greece.  It  is  generally 
conceded  that  Grecian  art  owed  little  to  Egypt  directly,  but  much  more  to 
Assyria. 


60  THE    OLD    EAST 

6  Helping  that  tendency  to  mysticism  and  mythologizing  which  Grote 
says,  III,  xxi,  ruined  so  many  speculative  minds  among  the  Greeks.  Mys- 
ticism and  thedsophy  were  main  traits  of  New-Platonism.  The  same  east- 
ern influence  appeared  in  the  Mithras-worship,  which  pervaded  the  Roman 
empire.     It  was  known  even  in  Britain,  carried  thither  by  Roman  soldiers. 


SELECT    BIBLIOGRAPHY    TO    CHAPTER     III 

i  Greece:  Grote,  H.  of  Greece,**  4th  ed.  [best]  10  vols.,  1872.  Cur- 
tius,  do.,*  5  vols.  Duncker,  H.  of  Greece,**  4  vols.  [Abbott's  tr.]. 
Zeller,  Philos.  of  the  Greeks.  Ranke,  Univ.  H.,  I.  Cox,  II .  of  Greece 
[to  consist  of  4  vols.].  Felton,  Greece  Anc.  and  Mod.  Hertzberg  [in 
Oncken],  Hellas  u.  Rom.  Mitford  and  Thirlwall,  still  good  on  many 
topics,  ii  Rome:  Mommsen,  H.  of  Rome**  [including  Bk.  VIII]. 
Merivale,  H.  of  the  Romans  under  the  Emp.**  [to  Marc  Aurelius]. 
Gibbon,  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Rom.  Emp.**  [These  three  standard 
works  cover,  in  the  order  given,  the  entire  reach  of  Roman  hist.]  Ranke, 
IVeltgesch*  Theile  II,  III,  IV.  Duruy,  H.  of  Rome  **  [16  vols.,  —  costly, 
yet  invaluable  as  a  presentation  of  Roman  civilization  and  life].  Curteis, 
Rom.  Emp.  from  Theodosius  to  Charles  Great.  [Student's  Series  contains, 
in  single  vols.,  Merivale's  Gen.  H.  of  Rome,  Liddell's  Rome,  and  Gib- 
bon.] Sismondi,  Hist,  de  la  chute  de  V  empire  romain*  2  vols.  Thierry 
[Amedee],  Tableau  de  I 'empire  romain.**  Schiller,  Gesch.  d.  rom. 
Kaiserzeit  [II  is  to  d.  of  Diocletian].  Nitzsch,  Gesch.  d.  rom.  Republik. 
Peter,  Romische  Gesch.,  3  Bde.  Cutts,  Constantine  the  Great.  Burck- 
hardt,  Times  of  do.*  Gregorovius,  der  Kaiser  Hadrian.  Arnold, 
Rom.  Provincial  Administration  to  Constantine.  Niebuhr,  H.  of  Rome, 
also  his  Lectures  on  do.  to  Fall  of  West.  Emp.  Madvig,  Verfassung  u. 
Verwaltung  d.  rom.  Staates,*  2  Bde.  Marquardt-Mommsen,  Romische 
Alterthiimer .**  Lange,  do.  Willems,  Droit  public  romain.*  iii  Chris- 
tianity :  Schaff,  H.  of  the  Christ.  Ch.;  *  Creeds  of  Ch't'ndom.  Neander, 
H.  of  Christ.  Relig.  and  Ch.,  I,  II;  Planting  and  Training  of  the  Christ.  Ch. 
Merivale,  Conversion  of  the  Rom.  Emp.**  Hase,  H.  of  the  Christ.  Ch.** 
Mosheim,  Commentaries  on  the  H.  of  Ch'ty  dg.  First  325  Yrs.**  Mil- 
man,  H.  of  Latin  Ch'ty.**  Lea,  Studies  in  Ch.  H.*  Dale,  Synod  of 
Elvira,  etc.  Smith,  The  Ch.  in  Roman  Gaul.  Northcote,  Roman  Cata- 
combs. Gwatkin,  Studies  of  Arianism.  De  Broglie,  L'Jglise  el  Vempire 
romain  au  iv  siecle  [from  catholic  point  of  view],  6  vols.  Rothe,  An- 
fdnge  d.  christlichen  Kirche.  Pressensd,  Early  Years  of  Ch'ty,  4  vols. 
Hatch,  Organization  of  the  Early  Christ.  Churches.*  Hefele,  H.  of  Coun- 
cils** [2d.  ed.  of  original,  1873  sqq.,  7  vols.].  'Primers  of  Christian 
Literature'  [ed.  by  Prof.  Fisher].  Allen,  Early  Ch'ty.  Lecky,  H.  of 
European  Morals,  I.  [The  latest  and  ablest  Ch.  Histories  are  Gieseler's 
Lehrbuch,  Brieger  and  Harnack's  ed.,  Kurtz,  9th  ed.,  3  vols.,  and  Hase's 
Lectures,  3  vols.]  iv  General:  Freeman,  Hist'l  Geog.,  chaps,  ii,  iii; 
Chief  Periods  of  European  H.**  Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,**  Bk.  VII.  v. 
Bosworth-Smith,  Carthage  and  the  Carthaginians.  Convenient  vols, 
have  appeared  in  the  Epochs  of  Anc.  H.  Ser.,  also  in  the  Story  of  the 
Nations  Ser. 


CHAPTER    III 

THE  CLASSICAL   PERIOD 


§  i     Character  of  Classical  Culture 

Lotze,  Mikrokosmus,  VII,  v. 

The  civilization  sketched  in  the  preceding  Chapter 
seemed  fated  not  to  pass  a  certain  grade  of  develop- 
ment.    For  this  and  other  reasons  its  influence  upon 
modern  times,  however  real,  has  been,  save  that  of  the 
Jewish  religion,  indirect  and  inappreciable.     The  cul- 
ture of  Greece  and  Rome,  on  the  other  hand,  had  supreme 
genius  for  growth  and  movement,  foreordaining  it  to  en- 
dure and  to  rule  the  future.     Through  these  immortal  y 
peoples  civilization  reached  a  totally  new  character:  av 
loftier  level,  a  richer  diversity.     In  particular,  Art,  Phi-  v 
losophy,   Administration,   Law   and    Religion  assumed  ^ 
during  the  classical  period,  forms  which  almost  promised  -. 
to  be  final.     As  cooperating  to  give  character  to  this 
new  order  of  ages  we  may  distinguish  four  groups  of 
elements :  Oriental,1  Grecian,  Roman,  Christian.      Bar- 
ring the  German,  these  are  the_  sole  storehouses  out  of 
which  the  modern  thought-world  has  received  its  stock. 

1  For  the  debt  of  the  classical  age  to  the  Orient,  see  Ch.  II,  §  19. 


64  the  classical  period 

§  2     Greece:  Exaltation  of  Mind 

Freeman,  Chief  Periods,  c  sq.     Hegel,  I  hilos.  of  Hist.,  Pt.  II.     Schlegel,  (Jo.,  ch.  viii. 
Ranke,  Weltgesch.,  Tkeil  I,  vii.    Zeller,  Greek  Philos.,  Int. 

The  leading  characteristics  of  the  Greeks,  their  chief 
glory,  lending  a  wholly  matchless  excellence  to  their 
history  and  literature  as  culture-studies,  were  fearless 
inquisitiveness  and  intense  devotion  to  ideals.  To  them 
thought  was  greater  than  things.  Here  at  length  ulti 
mate  being  no  less  than  visible  nature  is  regarded  know- 
able.  If  the  world  is  viewed  as  constituting  an  objective 
and  steadfast  order,  thinking  is  not  awed  and  dismayed  by 
it  as  in  Asia.  Brutes  no  longer  receive  worship,  either  as 
deities  or  as  symbols  of  them.  The  ancient  Pelasgi,  so 
early,  like  the  Germans  and  Persians,  adored  the  su- 
preme God  without  images  or  temples.  In  Greece,  in- 
dividuality,1 moral  life  and  rtruggle  rise  into  prominence: 
great  statesmen,  orators,  generals,  fine,  strong,  personal 
characters,  tower  above  the  multitude.  No  other  na- 
tional career  has  ever  been  so  brief  and  brilliant  at  once. 
'Absolute  despotism,  human  sacrifices,  polygamy,  de- 
liberate mutilation  of  the  person  as  a  punishment,  and 
the  selling  of  children  into  slavery,  existed  in  some  part 
or  other  of  the  br.rbarian  world,  but  are  not  found  in 
any  city  of  Greece  in  historical  times.'  To  this  noble 
race  belonged  the  first  examples  in  history,  of  states  at 
the  same  time  civilized  and  free.2  Greece  prized  the 
individual  man,  exalting  him  duly  as  against  nature,  if 
not  yet  enough  as  against  the  state. 

1  The  Greeks  like  the  Germans  tended  to  individualism,  the  Romans  to 
union.  It  was  their  individualistic  spirit,  become  unduly  developed,_\>;hich 
made  Greece  the  prey,  first  of  Mace  Ion,  then  of  Rome.     Mommsen,  Rome. 


THE   CLASSICAL    PERIOD  65 

I,  ch.  ii,  at  end,  instructively  discusses  the  differences  between  the  Greek 
and  the  Roman  nature,  so  striking  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  two  peoples 
were  originally  one. 

2  The  '  Eternal  Eastern  Question,'  Europe  against  Asia :  spirit,  man, 
against  nature,  force,  numbers,  which  still  agitates  the  Balkan  Peninsula, 
was,  it  is  not  fanciful  to  say,  the  subject  of  the  Trojan  War.  It  recurred  in 
the  Persian  Wars,  the  Punic  Wars,  the  Crusades,  at  Lepanto,  at  Inkerman. 
Cf.  Freeman,  as  above,  Lect.  I,  and  Contemp.  Rev.,  May,  1884. 


§  3     Organized  Intelligence 

Lotze,  as  at  §  1.    Adam  Smith,  Wealth  of  Nations,  V,  i.    Merivale,  ch.  xxii. 

In  Greece  thought  first  assumed  system,  struck  deep 
roots,  began  to  grasp  problems  with  consciousness.1  At 
no  other  time  has  the  human  mind  come  so  near  the 
exertion  of  its  supreme  energy  as  in  Attica  during  and 
just  after  the  age  of  Pericles.2  Later  too,  as  the  politi- 
cal power  of  Athens  waned,  her  supremacy  in  the  re- 
public of  letters  waxed  for  centuries  more  and  more  per- 
fect and  conspicuous.3  Among  the  Greeks,  general 
literature,  history,  oratory,  the  drama,  in  a  word  the  j 
world's  settled  intellectual  life,  had  their  beginnings. 
So  of  systematic  education,  schools,4  etc. :  the  Romans 
received  these  from  Greece,  and  we,  through  the  middle 
age,  from  them.  Even  in  Rome's  brightest  day  all  her 
best  literature  and  intellectual  activity  took  their  shape 
and  inspiration  in  great  degree  from  Hellas.  Each  suc- 
ceeding age,  our  own  included,  has  been  under  a  similar 
debt.5 

1  '  However  much  knowledge,  skill  and  wisdom,  as  shown  in  maxims, 
earlier  nations  may  have  had  and  employed  in  the  regulation  of  social 
relations  and  in  systematic  art,  the  thought  of  seeking  out  the  very  grounds 
and  bases  of  our  judgment  of  things,  and  of  combining  them  demonstra- 
tively and  deductively  in  a  system  of  truths,  the  foundation,  in  fact,  of 
science,  will  forever  remain  the  glory  of  the  Greeks.'  —  Lotze. 


66  THE   CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

2  Aeschylus  [525-456],  Sophocles  [496-405],  Euripides  [480-406], 
Aristophanes  [444-380],  Herodotus  [484-424],  Thucydides  [471-396], 
Phidias  [490-432],  Ictinus,  Callicrates,  Mnesicles  [these  three  contemp. 
with  Pericles],  Polygnotus  [contemp.  with  Phidias],  Socrates  [469-399], 
Zeno,  Anaxagoras,  Protagoras,  Plato  [429-347].  We  prefer  still,  with 
Ranke,  against  Freeman,  to  latinize  Greek  names. 

8  Thus  the  early  bishops  of  Rome  were  for  three  centuries  mainly  of 
Greek  extraction.  Their  church,  and  most  of  the  other  churches  in  the 
West  were  Greek  religious  colonies,  their  language,  organization,  writers, 
scriptures  and  liturgy  being  Greek.  —  Milman,  Lat.  Ch'ty,  Vol.  I,  54. 
Novatian,  about  250,  is  the  first  Roman  clergyman  known  to  have  written 
in  Latin,  though  possibly  Victor,  about  200,  may  have  done  so. 

4  For  the  propagation  of  systematic  education  from  the  classic  to  the 
middle  age  we  owe  hardly  less  to  Boethius  [470-574]  and  Cassiodorus 
[480-575]  at  the  court  of  Theodoric  than  to  Alcuin  and  his  colleagues  at 
that  of  Karl  the  Great.     Cf.  Ch.  V,  §  9. 

6  '  If  their  language  is  dead,  yet  the  literature  it  enshrines  is  rammed 
with  life  as  perhaps  no  other  writing,  except  Shakespeare's.  .  .  .  Oblivion 
looks  in  the  face  of  the  Grecian  Muse  only  to  forget  her  errand.' —  Lowell. 


§  4    Philosophy 

Zeller,  as  at  §  2.     Ueberweg,  Hist,  of  Philos.,  I.     Schulze,  Philos.  der  Renaissance. 
Hefele,  Councils,  I. 

This  as  an  orderly  discipline  owes  its  very  birth  to 
the  Greeks,  to  their  daring  quest  for  truth  mentioned 
above.  The  evolution  of  Greek  metaphysical  thinking 
comprises  three  movements,  (i)  the  materialistic,  Thales,1 
Heraclitus,  Empedocles,  Democritus,  (2)  the  idealistic 
or  Eleatic-Socratic,  culminating  in  Platonism,  (3)  the 
Aristotelian,  a  combination,  in  a  way  the  reconciliation, 
of  the  first  two.  If  in  its  moral  aspect  we  classify  New- 
Platonism  as  oriental,  Greek  ethical  philosophizing  re- 
duces to  Stoicism  and  Epicureanism,  two  antagonistic 
doctrines  still  at  war  to-day.  These  great  schools  long 
outlasted  Greece.     From  the  time  of  the  Antonines  till 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  6? 

silenced  by  Justinian's  edict,2  529,  an  unbroken  line  of 
philosophers  :  Platonists,  Peripatetics,  Stoics  and  Epi- 
cureans, taught  in  Athens  at  public  cost.  The  influ- 
ence of  their  doctrines  was  absorbed  rather  than  de- 
stroyed by  the  prevalence  of  Christianity.  Stoicism 
spread  westward,  passing  into  Roman  law  and  Christian 
life ;  Platonism,  tinged  now  with  theosophy,  loved  the 
East,  affecting  Christian  doctrine  and  discussion  more. 
Three  great  conceptions  peculiar  to  Platonism  are  pres- 
ent in  the  Nicene  creed.3  In  the  middle  age,  Aristotle, 
as  '  the  philosopher,'  exercised  prodigious  and  incredible 
influence,4  lessened  toward  the  Renaissance  by  the  ris- 
ing popularity  of  Plato.  Even  now,  no  deep  philoso- 
pheme  can  be  thoroughly  handled  without  recurring  to 
the  thoughts  of  these  incomparable  masters. 

1  Not  an  accident  that  Greek  materialism  had  its  origin  and  chief  seat 
in  Asia.     Cf.  §  3. 

2  Proclus,  412-483  A.D.,  lived  and  taught  at  Athens.  His  pupils, 
Isidorus,  Damascius  and  Simplicius  were  the  last  ancient  public  teachers 
of  heathen  philosophy.  When  Justinian,  lusting  for  the  revenues,  closed 
the  Athenian  schools,  they  fled  to  Persia,  subsequently  returning,  but  never 
teaching  again.    All  three  died  in  obscurity.  —  Gibbon,  IV,  108  sqq. 

8  Arius  used  Plato's  world-soul  as  schema  for  the  Logos  or  second 
person  of  the  Trinity;  Athanasius,  Plato's  supreme  '  Good.'  The  Sabellian 
undertone  of  the  creed  echoes  the  attribute-hypostasizing  utterances  of 
New-Platonism,  so  often  heard  in  Philo.  Cf.  Gibbon,  II,  215  sqq.;  Bright, 
Notes  on  Canons  of  First  Four  Gen'l  Councils ;  also  Richey,  Nicene  Creed 
and  the  Filioque.  The  Greek  fathers  freely  referred  to  Plato  as  an  author- 
ity on  the  Trinity,  the  two  natures  of  Christ  and  the  unity  of  mankind. 
Justin  Martyr  calls  Plato  a  Christian.  Athenagoras  sees  in  the  doctrines 
of  the  philosophers  and  especially  of  Plato,  the  activity  of  the  divine  Logos. 
Augustine  admits  that  the  New-Platonists,  though  without  revelation, 
possess  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

4  When  the  Jesuit,  Scheiner,  contemporary  with  Galileo  in  observing 
the  spots  on  the  sun,  made  known  his  discovery  to  his  provincial  superior, 


68  THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

the  latter  refused  to  believe  in  the  spots  or  even  to  look  through  the 
telescope,  saying  that  he  had  read  Aristotle  through  many  times  without 
finding  aught  like  what  Scheiner  mentioned.  This  distemper  Hobbes 
called  '  Aristotelity.'  —  Bisset,  Essays  on  Hist'l  Truth,  79. 


§  5     Art 

Reber,  Hist,  of  Ancient  Art,  do.  of  Mediaeval  Art.  IVoltmann  and  Woermann,  Hist, 
of  Painting.  Overbed,  Gesch.  d.  grieschischen  Plastik.  Perrot  and  Chipitz, 
Ancient  Art.    'Archaeology'  in  Encyc.  Brit.    Mitchell,  Ancient  Sculpture,  x-xxxvi. 

The  Greeks  surpassed  all  other  peoples  in  the  keen- 
ness and  discipline  of  their  sense  of  beauty.  This  was 
a  radical  trait,  one  of  those  through  which  they  have 
most  influenced  subsequent  ages.  All  classical  art  was 
essentially  Greek,  whether  originating  in  Rome,  Magna 
Graecia  or  Etruria,  though  early  Etruscan  betrays  marked 
oriental  influence.  No  proper  Roman  school  or  Chris- 
tian school  ever  rose.1  Under  Augustus,  under  Ha- 
drian even,  few  other  than  Greek  artists  wrought,  none 
but  Greek  models  and  traditions  were  followed.  While 
in  Painting  we  have  no  easel  pictures,  and  from  the 
greatest  artists  no  works  whatever,  innumerable  mosaics, 
wall  decorations,  vases,  etc.,2  where  imitators  have  end- 
lessly repeated  the  old  masterpieces,  justify  the  fame  of 
Polygnotus,  Zeuxis,  Apelles  and  the  rest.  Leading 
characteristics  of  this  old  painting  were  (a)  beauty  of 
forms,  especially  of  human,  (b)  diversity  of  subject, 
(c)  fineness  and  grandeur  of  conception,  (d)  economy 
and  simplicity  of  means  in  producing  intended  effects, 
(e)  poverty  in  execution  relatively  to  excellence  of  con- 
ception. Doubtless  the  last  is  truer  of  extant  speci- 
mens than  of  their  originals.  In  the  other  departments 
of  antique  art  we  are  more  fortunate,  possessing  the 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  69 

richest  variety  and  number  of  original  specimens,  evi- 
dently from  the  best,  some  of  them  as  yet  unsurpassed 
if  not  absolutely  perfect.3  All  that  Greek  Sculpture,  in 
comparison,  e.g.,  with  Michel  Angelo's,  lost  in  power 
through  negligence  of  anatomy,  it  gained  in  grace  by 
diligent  and  practised  notice  of  living  forms.  The  great 
Greek  styles  of  Architecture,  Doric,  Ionic,  Corinthian, 
have  never  been  superseded  or  improved.  Along  with 
changes  in  minor  elements,  the  principles,  proportions 
and  general  form  of  all  fine  buildings  since,  Gothic  in- 
cluded, have  reproduced  the  classic  tradition.  Even  de- 
parture from  the  antique  in  details,  taste  has  twice,  at 
the  Renaissance  and  again  at  the  close  of  the  last  cen- 
tury, emphatically  condemned,  commanding  return  to 
classic  models. 

1  On  the  lack  of  art  taste  in  the  Romans  proper,  Friedlander,  Sittengesch. 
Horns,  Th.  II,  103,  III,  105  sq.  The  same  author  has  also  a  brochure, 
Ueber  den  Kunstsinn  der  R'omer  in  der  Kaiserzeit,  which  evoked  a  reply 
with  similar  title  from  K.  F.  Hermann,  defending  the  Romans.  But  in 
Hermann's  Kulturgesch.  der  Griechen  u.  R'omer,  126  and  154,  Roman 
taste  is  characterized  nearly  as  unfavorably  as  by  Friedlander.  Tacitus, 
dial,  de  oratt.,  c.  10 :  Ut  semel  vidit,  transit  et  contentus  est,  ut  si  picturam 
aliquam  statuamve  vidisset.  Cf.  Cicero,  de  /egg.,  II,  ii,  4.  Consul  L. 
Mummius,  having  conquered  Corinth,  148  or  147  B.C.,  in  forwarding  the 
pictures  and  statues  to  Rome,  told  the  sailors  that  if  they  lost  or  damaged 
any,  they  would  have  to  replace  them  with  others  of  equal  value.  The 
Basilica  may  be  accounted  a  Roman  product.  The  Arch  and  Dome, 
though  importations  (Ch.  II,  §  9,  n.  5),  received  development  and  per- 
fection at  Rome.  Nero's  new  Rome,  after  the  great  fire  of  A.D.  64,  was 
built  in  the  most  perfect  Greek  fashion,  as  had  been,  indeed,  all  the  public 
structures  reared  since  the  accession  of  Augustus.  Cf.  Merivale,  liii.  The 
Antinous-cycle  of  representations  comes  nearer  than  aught  else  in  plastic 
art  to  being  of  Roman  origination.  It  arose  in  Hadrian's  time.  The  finest 
Antinous  is  in  the  Capitoline  Museum.  In  all  the  Christian  art  for  cen- 
turies God  and  Christ  were  figured  with  Apollo's  head.  On  art  at  Rome, 
Mitchell,  xxxiv-xxxvi. 


JO  THE   CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

2  Preserved  with  Pompeii,  and  elsewhere.  The  best  Pompeian  pieces 
are  now  in  the  Naples  Museum. 

8  Not  only  in  sculpture  and  architecture,  but  also  in  drawing,  the  Greeks 
quite  equalled  the  moderns.    They  did  little  in  music. 

§  6     Political  Ideas 

Freeman,  Comparative  Politics;  Hist,  of  Federal  Government,  I.  Lecky,  Rationalism 
in  Europe,  II,  218 sqq.  Heeren,  Politics  of  Anc.  Greece,  ch.  ix.  Montesquieu,  Spirit 
of  the  Laws.    May,  Democracy  in  Europe,  I,  ii-v. 

The  Greeks  are  our  earliest  instructors  in  politics, 
with  their  notions  of  which  they  have  impressed  man- 
kind in  four  ways  :  i  Through  great  statesmen  and  law- 
givers.    Thus  the  twelve  tables  of  Roman  law  and  the 

/\  Servian  Constitution 1  were  drawn  up  after  study  of 
Grecian  models  and  maxims,  ii  Through  the  political 
writings  of  philosophers,  chief  of  which,  Plato's  Repub- 

/\  lie  and  Aristotle's  Politics.2  iii  Through  their  actual  1 
forms  of  government.3  Greece  furnished  the  types  of 
nearly  all  the  governmental  polities  which  have  had 
place  since  :  I  Royalty,  (a)  the  old-Aryan  or  heroic, 
of  Homeric  times,  (b)  the  more  absolute  Macedonian, 
(c)  the  effete  or  nominal  Spartan.  2  Aristocracy, 
(a)  more  oligarchical,  Sparta,  (b)  more  democratic, 
Athens.  3  Federations,  (a)  with  single  supreme  head, 
the  Athenian  supremacy,  the  Spartan,  the  Theban,  the 
Macedonian,  —  such  leagues  sometimes  free,  sometimes 
forced,  (b)  on  a  footing  of  equality,  the  Achaean  and 
Aetolian  Leagues.4  iv  Through  the  history  of  the  in- 
teraction, vicissitudes  and  destinies  of  these  differently 
constituted  states  and  confederacies.2  Besides  these 
legitimate  polities,  tyranny  showed  itself  in  Greece,  now 
for  good,  now  for  evil.5  Evoked  in  part  by  this  was 
that  zeal  for  freedom,  so  strong  and  general  in  the  Hel- 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  7 1 

lenic  race,  which  burns  in  the  orations  of  Demosthenes. 
As  individual  tyranny  fostered  this  spirit,  the  tyranny 
of  states  over  states  bred  patriotism,  not  identical  with 
the  other  sentiment,  yet  nearer  to  it  then  than  now, 
since  Antiquity  made  more  of  civil  than  of  personal 
liberty.6 

1  Mommsen,  I,  141,  364.  Ortolan's  and  Heron's  doubt  as  to  Greek 
influence  upon  the  xii  Tables  seems  ill  founded. 

2  See  the  pol.  writings  of  Algernon  Sidney,  Locke  and  Montesquieu. 
Hobbes,  Leviathan,  xxix  :  '  And  as  to  rebellion,  in  particular  against 
monarchy,  one  of  the  most  frequent  causes  of  it  is  the  reading  of  the  books 
of  policy  and  the  histories  of  the  ancient  Greeks  and  Romans.'  The  tirade 
continues  at  some  length. 

3  Grote,  Pt.  II,  ix.  Compare  Grote's  fervor  for  Grecian  democracy  with 
the  coolness  of  Mitford  and  Curtius. 

*  Freeman,  Fed.  Gov't,  has  the  most  satisfactory  account  of  these 
Leagues.  Cf.  Smith's  Greece,  ch.  xlvi;  Thirl  wall,  lxi  [Achaean],  lxiii 
[Aetolian] ;  Tozer,  '  Greece,'  sec.  ii,  in  Encyc.  Brit. 

5  Grote,  as  at  n.  3.  Aristotle,  Politics,  V,  i-v.  Philip  did  not  think  of 
conquering  Greece,  as  Alexander  conquered  Persia.  He  sought  merely  a 
Macedonian  headship,  like  that  which  Epaminondas  had  procured  for 
Thebes.  —  Droysen,  Gesch.  Alexanders,  I,  i. 

6  Cf.  §  9. 

§  7     Propagation  of  these  Elements 

Mommsen,  Rome,  I,  x.  Freeman,  Chief  Periods,  13  sqq.  Droysen,  Gesck.  Alex- 
anders des  Grossen.  Grote,  xxii  sqq.  [colonies],  xciv  [Alexander].  Williams, 
Life  of  Alexander  the  Great.     Thirhvall,  lv. 

Hellenic  civilization  forced  itself  upon  the  world 
partly  by  its  sheer  superiority,  by  the  mental  domi- 
nance,1 natural  and  acquired,  of  its  bearers,  partly  by 
colonization  2  and  conquest.  The  Greeks  were  adepts 
in  colonization,  planting  miniature  Greek  common- 
wealths on  every  shore,  nearly  every  island,  of  the 
Mediterranean,  and  on  the  Euxine,  early  surpassing  in 


72  THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

this  their  teachers  and  rivals,  the  Phoenicians.  Many 
of  these  remote  regions  equalled  the  mother  land  in  cul- 
ture, outdid  her  in  wealth.  A  still  broader  and  more 
fruitful  dissemination  of  Greek  ideas  attended  the  con- 
quering march  of  Alexander.3  The  importance  of  his 
conquests  was  even  greater  than  their  magnitude  would 
imply.  His  empire  soon  crumbled,  but  the  civilization 
by  him  introduced  remained,  and,  in  Egypt  and  West 
Asia  at  least,  effected  tremendous  changes.  The  seeds 
of  civilization  early  sent  by  these  lands  to  Greece  were 
now  paid  for  in  the  matured  fruit.  Asia  was  hellenized.4 
Alexandria  long  rivalled,  then  excelled,  Athens  as  a 
focus  of  Hellenism.  From  here,  not  to  speak  of  other 
influences,  a  new  Judaism  went  forth,  everywhere  pro- 
foundly modifying  the  old,  providentially  preparing  for 
Christianity.  Also,  at  these  oriental  schools  of  Greek 
thought,  not  at  Athens,  were  trained  the  great  theo- 
logians, who  outlined  Christian  doctrine  for  all  time. 

1  Thus  Macedon,  Epirus  and  Acarnania,  which  even  as  late  as  Thucy- 
dides's  time  were  practically  in  barbaric  rudeness,  at  length  fully  assume 
the  Greek  spirit  and  culture.  So  Rome  and  Italy  fell  under  Greek  influ- 
ence, and  to  an  extent  the  whole  empire.  With  this  should  be  remembered 
what  Greece  did  to  save  civilization  in  a  trying  crisis.  'No  enlightened 
man  can  think  of  the  battles  of  Marathon  and  Salamis  without  perceiving 
their  important  consequence  to  the  race  at  large.'  —  Condorcet,  quoted  by 
Comte. 

2  Curtius,  Die  Gr.  als  Meister  d.  Colonization,  Deutsche  Rundschau, 
June,  1883. 

8  Grote,  xciv,  doubtless  correctly,  denies  that  this  was  any  part  of 
Alexander's  intention. 

*  In  this  dissemination  of  Greek  culture  Islam  but  carried  further  the 
work  of  the  Diadochi.  —  Kugler,  Crusades,  1 9. 


the  classical  period  73 

§  8     Rome  :  Genius  and  Place  in  History 

Schlegel,  Philos.  of  Hist.  Hegel,  do.,  Pt.  III.  Lotze,  as  at  §  i.  Freeman,  Chiel 
Periods,  i-iii;  Contemp.  Rev.,  May,  1884.  Mommsen,  I,  ii,  iii,  v.  Milman,  vol. 
vii,  174. 

Rome  forms  the  centre  of  European  history.1  Built 
out  of  older  nations  and  absorbing  their  civilization  — 
all  civilization,  whether  Greek,  Christian  or  other,  could 
at  length  be  called  Roman  —  it  broke  up  into  the  vari- 
ous European  states,  discharging  thither  the  intellectual 
stores  gathered  from  its  own  mighty  life  and  from  its 
incorporation  of  other  commonwealths.  In  studying  the 
Roman  people  one  is  struck  by  the  preponderance  in 
them  of  moral  and  practical  over  theoretical  and  scien- 
tific interests.2  Action,  achievement,  and,  as  means  to 
these,  order,  system,  law,  forms,  not  attention  to  ideas 
or  ideals  as  such,  mark  the  Roman  nature.3  Hence  the 
Roman  genius  for  organization,  government,  discipline, 
military  performance  4  and  conquest ;  hence  the  Roman 
family,  army,  law,  religion,  church,  the  firmly  centralized 
ecclesiastical  polity  of  the  middle  age,  and  the  domi- 
nance even  till  now  of  legal  conceptions  in  European 
and  American  theology.5 

1  'The  centre  of  our  studies,  the  goal  of  our  thoughts,  the  point  to 
which  all  paths  lead  and  the  point  from  which  all  paths  start  again,  is  to 
be  found  in  Rome  and  her  abiding  power.'  —  Freeman.  He  calls  this 
great  truth  the  '  groundwork  of  all  sound  historic  teaching,'  and  continu- 
ally, though  none  too  often,  repeats  it.  '  He  who  ends  his  work  in  476 
and  he  who  begins  his  work  in  476  can  neither  of  them  ever  understand  in 
its  fulness  the  abiding  life  of  Rome;  neither  can  fully  grasp  the  depth  and 
power  of  that  truest  of  all  sayings  which  speaks  of  Rome  as  the  Eternal 
City.'  As  the  rise  of  Rome  was  central  in  history,  the  Second  Punic 
War  was  central  in  the  rise  of  Rome. 

2  '  Greece  lived  from  hand  to  mouth,  passionately  pursuing  immediate 
ends,  while  the  Romans  were  guided  by  a  wider  view,  embracing  the 


74  THE   CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

future.  .  .  •  Greece  still  lives,  though  without  any  striking  influence  on 
the  conditions  of  our  lives,  but  countless  present  social  and  political  ar- 
rangements and  a  great  part  of  our  mental  life  may  be  traced  back  along 
unbroken  tradition  to  Rome.' —  Lotze. 

3  Milman,  Lat.  Ch'ty,  Vol.  I,  27.  Heeren,  Pol.  Discourses,  118,  notices 
that  the  peninsula  of  Italy  never  gave  birth  to  any  theory,  either  in  Roman 
times  or  since.  On  the  other  hand,  as  Adam  Smith,  Wealth  of  Na.,  V,  i, 
keenly  observed,  no  state  in  Greece  ever  developed  law  into  a  science,  as 
did  the  Romans. 

*  There  seems  to  have  been  a  continuous  military  tradition  as  to  tactics, 
strategy,  and  the  whole  art  of  war,  from  Caesar  and  Trajan  to  Napoleon 
and  von  Moltke.  Far  more  important  among  our  unnoticed  inheritances 
from  Rome  is  the  holding  of  land  in  severalty,  as  proprium,  instead  of 
that  community-holding  which  prevailed  among  our  German  ancestors  and 
even  at  primitive  Rome  itself. 

5  Fisher,  Discussions  in  Hist,  and  Theol.,  47  sqq. 

§  9    Political  Universality  and  Absolutism 

Freeman,  as  at  §  8.     Thierry,  Tableau.     Jung,  Romanische  Landschaften  d.  rom. 

Reichs. 

The  great  eastern  empires,  caring  and  doing  nothing 
for  subjects,  received  no  loyalty  and  fell  before  the  first 
resolute  foe.  Three  battles  annihilated  Persia.  To  the 
Greek  states  their  own  subjects  were  loyal  enough,  but 
conquered  peoples  they  did  not  win.  Rome  both  se- 
cured from  her  own  citizens  a  better  than  Greek  patri- 
otism, and  incorporated  as  well  as  conquered  the  world. 
'  The  necessary  unity  of  the  world-empire,  and  the  neces- 
sary perpetuity  of  the  city  of  Rome  as  centre  of  such 
empire,  became  axiomatic  ideas,  living  on,  tenacious,  in- 
eradicable, quite  through  the  middle  age.1  Thus  is  to 
be  explained  the  surprising  respect  had  for  Rome  by  all 
the  barbarians,  even  in  her  decline.2  This  result  is  the 
more  wonderful  in  that  it  was  not  liberty  as  now  con- 
ceived which  Rome  bestowed.     All  ancient  states  were 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  75 

absolute,  assuming  to  dominate  every  department  of  in- 
dividual life,  the  state  regarding  itself  the  end  and  aim 
of  the  individual's  existence.3  This  idea,  advocated  by  >/ 
Plato,  Sparta  relentlessly  carried  out.  Rome  too,  both 
in  very  early  times  and  under  the  empire,  made  of  citi- 
zens almost  slaves  to  the  state.  So  widely  enforced 
and  so  debasing  did  this  condition  become  in  the  later 
years  of  the  old  empire,  that  at  length  it  apparently 
quenched  all  wish  for  a  freer  civil  condition.  The  no- 
tion of  absolute  government  became  embodied  in  Roman 
public  law,  whence  we  see  it  in  later  times  so  asserting 
itself  in  France,  in  the  mediaeval  empire  and  in  the 
church  as  to  give  their  main  character  to  whole  periods 
of  history.4 

1  Graf,  Roma  nella  memoria  e  nelle  imaginazione  del  medio  evo  [2  v., 
Turin,  1883].     Cf.  Voigt,  Wiederbelebung  d.  klassischen  Alterthums,  I,  2, 
and  Dante's  De  Monorchia.     Tertullian,  so  early,  had  written  that  Rome  •/ 
would  last  as  long  as  the  world. 

2  Bryce,  Holy  Roman  Empire,  ch.  iii.  •  Rome '  ceased  to  mean  a  city. 
It  meant  the  Roman  world.  Rome  stood  for  civilization.  The  invaders, 
Attila  excepted,  had  no  wish  to  destroy.  They  were  awed.  Alaric  thought 
the  eastern  emperor  a  divinity.  Odoacer,  at  liberty  to  do  so,  shrunk 
from  assuming  the  crown  that  he  had  jostled  from  Romulus  Augustulus's 
head. 

8  '  It  was  not  from  any  consciousness  of  his  individual  dignity  or  of  the 
dignity  of  humanity  that  the  citizen  of  the  victorious  republic  repelled  in- 
sult or  injury;  but  to  inflict  stripes  upon  him  was  to  insult  the  majestic 
city,  to  put  fetters  upon  his  limbs  was  to  bind  limbs  that  ought  always  to 
be  free  for  the  service  of  the  state.'  —  Greene,  View  of  American  Revolu- 
tion, 109.     Cf.  Taine,  Contemp.  Rev.,  Oct.,  1884,  507  sq. 

4  The  reference  is  especially  to  the  days  of  Frederic  Barbarossa  in  the 

(empire,  and  of  St.  Louis  and  Philip  the  Fair  in  France.  The  canon  law, 
which  made  the  great  popes  so  bold,  was  partly  a  reproduction,  partly  an 
imitation,  of  the  civil.  See  Chaps.  V  and  VI,  and  Guizot's  Essai  on  the 
Roman  municipal  system. 


j6  the  classical  period 

§  10    The  Latin  Language 

Milmatt,  index,  'Latin  language.'    Hallam,  Middle  Ages,  index,  'Learning';  Litera- 
ture of  Europe,  I,  i.     Sismondi,  Literature  of  the  South  of  Europe,  I,  i. 

If  most  else  in  Roman  culture  owed  much  to  Greece, 
the  Latin  speech  was  a  truly  home  growth.1  Its  influ- 
ence is  not  easily  overestimated.  It  has  furnished  all 
generations  since  with  choice  means  of  linguistic  disci- 
pline, and  it  has  been  vehicle  to  them  of  a  literature 
rivalling  the  Greek  in  beauty  if  not  in  originality  or 
power.  Till  comparatively  recent  times  Latin  was, 
throughout  all  Western  Europe,  the  medium  of  liturgy, 
literature,  history,  diplomacy,  of  law  in  its  two  kinds,2  of 
science,  philosophy  and  theology  in  all  their  forms,  and 
of  all  learned  commerce  both  oral  and  written.  It 
founded  the  various  Romance  tongues3  and  has  had 
powerful  hand  in  shaping  German  and  English.  Preach- 
ing was  first  exclusively,  then  usually,  then  occasionally 
in  Latin.4  The  Vulgate  was  long  the  world's  religious 
code.  It  was  principally  in  consequence  of  the  univer- 
sal use  of  Latin  in  the  church  that :  i  This  language 
took  on  a  sacred  character,  which  came  to  be  associated 
with  all  Roman  things.  2  For  several  centuries  nearly 
the  entire  clergy  was  of  Latin  stock,  filled  with  Roman 
ideas,  ecclesiastical  and  other,  which  thus  gained  greatly 
in  power  over  society.  In  this  way  survived,  partly  in- 
dependently, partly  by  mitigating  barbarian  manners,  a 
culture  in  Italy,  Provence  and  Spain,  which  could  defy 
even  the  barbarians.  3  The  Latin  elements  :  roots, 
word-building,  syntax,  of  the  various  vernacular  tongues 
received  greatly  increased  prominence.5  4  The  unity 
of  Europe  was  made  possible  and  furthered. 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  Jf 

1  Not,  of  course,  that  Latin  had  not  by  Cicero's  time  become  considera- 
bly enriched  by  accession  of  Greek  words. 

2  I.e.,  civil  and  canon. 

3  Among  which  remember  to  place  the  Roumanian.     German,  too,  is 
far  more  Romanic  than  commonly  thought.     Compare  Ulfilas's  Bible  with  / 
Luther's. 

4  The  Council  of  Trent  [session  4],  so  late,  orders  the  Vulgate  to  be 
taken  pro  authentica,  and  virtually  places  it  above  the  original.  Texts  for 
sermons  were  to  be  drawn  only  from  it. 

3  A  third  of  the  modern  German  vocabulary,  word-forms  and  grammat- 
ical law  is  of  Romanic  origin. 


§  11     Roman  Law 

Gibbon,  ch.  xliv.  Ortolan,  Explication  historique  des  Instituts.  Morey,  Roman 
Law.  Hadley,  Int.  to  Roman  Law.  Hunter,  do.  Motnmsen,  I,  xi,  II,  viii. 
Thierry,  Tableau,  IV.  IVillems,  Droit  public  romain.  Roby,  Int.  to  Justinian's 
Digest.     Guizot,  Civilization  in  France,  Lect.  x  and  xi. 

The  savage  provisions  of  primitive  Roman  law,  the 
powers1  it  gave  to  creditors  and  to  fathers,  were  done 
away  mainly  by  three  influences  :  I  The  praetorsJiip. 
The  urban  praetor  was  judge,  but  the  percgrinits  had  a 
function  largely  legislative.  He  was  free  to  apply  the 
law  of  nature  and  the  best  laws  of  all  peoples,  as  well  as 
to  appeal  to  reason  and  equity.  So  were  the  provincial 
praetors.  With  the  increase  at  Rome  of  a  cosmopolitan 
spirit  this  quasi-legislation  proved  more  and  more  feli- 
citous. The  edictam  perpetuum  2  of  the  praetors  became  I 
a  compend  of  rational  law,  reacting  by  its  superiority, 
upon  that  of  the  xii  tables  and  gradually  forcing  this 
into  desuetude.  2  Imperial  legislation.  Very  many 
emperors,  especially  between  Nero  and  Commodus, 
were  at  once  wise  and  truly  solicitous  for  the  good  of 
their  subjects.  Under  the  empire,  imperial  constitu- 
tions were  practically  the  sole  source  of  law.     As  they 


< 


/( 


yB  THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

were  framed  with  the  advice  of  the  ablest  lawyers,  some 
of  the  best  laws  proceeded  from  the  worst  emperors.3 
3  Scientific  jurisprudence.  This  grew  out  of  the  ex- 
perience and  the  discussions  incident  to  praetorian  ad- 
ministration, and  partook  the  rational  and  human  char- 
acter of  the  same.  The  influence  of  law  schools  and  of 
eminent  jurisconsults  was  immense  and  often  direct. 
Thus  Augustus  formed  a  special  board  of  jurists  to  have 
authoritative  review  of  all  doubtful  judicial  decisions,  an 
arrangement  lasting,  modified,  till  Justinian.  From 
these  potent  causes  resulted  an  entire  transformation  of 
the  old  law,  making  it  humane  for  barbarous,  human  for 
merely  Roman,  'written  reason.'4  Codified  by  Theodo- V 
sius  II  in  the  fifth  century,  more  thoroughly  by  Justin- 
ian in  the  sixth,  and  contributing  large  matter  to  the 
codes  of  all  the  new  kingdoms  in  the  West,5  it  could 
maintain  itself  in  vigor  through  the  darkest  years  of  the 
following  centuries.  Raised  to  new  life  by  ardent  study 
at  Bologna  in  the  twelfth,  it  endures  still,  furnishing  the 
spirit,  principles  and  to  a  great  extent  the  substance  of 
all  modern  bodies  of  law,6  second  in  forwarding  civiliza- 
tion to  no  single  force  save  Christianity. 

1  Including  power  to  put  to  death.  •  On  the  third  market  day  [after 
judgment,  the  debt  not  having  been  paid]  let  them  cut  [the  debtor]  in 
pieces,  and  if  they  cut  more  or  less  it  shall  be  no  crime.1  —  Tab.  Ill,  vi. 

2  Publishing  the  principles,  modes  and  scope  of  their  procedure,  and 
styled  '  perpetual '  in  contrast  with  edicta  repentina,  touching  minor  and 
occasional  matters.  Being  changed  but  little  it  became  '  perpetual :  in  a 
secondary  sense,  as  it  did  in  a  tertiary  when  Hadrian  made  it  legally  per- 
manent.    Marc  Aurelius  modified  it  and  extended  it  over  the  provinces. 

8  Thus  it  was  Caracalla  who,  in  212  A.D.,  gave  its  final  extent,  including  \ 
all  freemen  in  the  empire,  to  the  Roman  franchise.     From  Augustus  to 
Alexander  Severus  [d.  235  A.D.]  was  the  golden  age  of  Roman  lawyers. 


ence 
from 


THE    CLASSICAL   PERIOD  79 

The  greatest  of  them,  Papinian,  was  flourishing  at  200;  Caius,  next  in 
rank,  at  150.  The  chief  law  schools  were  at  Rome,  Constantinople  and 
Berytus  [Beirut]. 

4  '  The  pearl  of  Roman  civilization,  the  development  of  law.'  —  Lotze. 
Neque  voluit  [deus]  ut  per  nos  tantum  lux  justitiae  eniteat,  sed  voluit  ut 
per  Romanos  quoque  luceret  et  splenderet.  —  Apostolic  Const.,  VI,  24.  > 

6  Ch.  IV,  §  1.  Roman  law  was  at  no  moment  disused  in  the  West,  the  \j 
northern  conquerors  ruling  by  it  all  their  Roman  subjects.  Besides,  the 
works  of  Justinian,  esp.  the  Pandects,  were  studied.  Peter  of  Valence 
published  in  the  12th  century  a  law-book,  wherein  he  used  material  from 
every  part  of  the  Corpus  Juris  :  Institutes,  Pandects,  Code  and  Novels. 
Yet  the  discovery  at  the  sack  of  Amalfi,  1135,  °^  tne  Florentine  copy  of 
the  Pandects  greatly  stimulated  the  study.  —  Guizot,  Civilization  in  France, 
Lect.  xi.  There  were  two  codes,  the  Gregorian  and  the  Hermogenian, 
before  A. D.  438,  the  date  of  the  Theodosian.  They  were  of  private  origin, 
and  their  date  is  uncertain. 

6  It  has  had  least  influence  on  English  and  American  law,  where  it  has 
been  felt  in  chancery  and  equity  almost  alone.  Louisiana,  however,  re- 
tains the  Romanic  basis  given  to  her  law  when  under  French  rule.  Mac- 
kenzie's Roman  Law  exhibits  ably  and  interestingly  the  Roman  elements  *,. 
in  modern  European  law.  Savigny,  Gesch.  d.  romischen  Rechts  im  Mit- 
telalter  [one  vol.  exists  in  Eng.],  traces  Roman  law  from  the  dissolution 
of  Rome  onward.  The  grand  and  peerless  character  of  the  law  is  best 
set  forth  in  v.  Ihering,  Geist  d.  romischen  Rechts. 

§  12     Stoicism 

Thierry,  Tableau  III,  iii.  Cf.  his  art.  in  Revue  des  deux  Mondes,  Juin,  1873. 
Capes,  Stoicism.  Holland,  Reign  of  the  Stoics.  Zeller,  Stoics,  Epicureans  and 
Sceptics. 

This  remarkable  result  was  the  combined  effect  of 
Christianity  and  Stoicism.  It  was  through  her  law 
that  Rome,  contributing  nothing  to  the  original  discus- 
sion of  it,  did  most  to  perpetuate  and  enforce  Greek 
philosophy.  Chrysippus's  conception  of  a  law  of  nature, 
when  rendered  practical  by  Roman  jurists,  secured  a 
sweep  of  influence  in  human  thought  and  conduct  to 
which  no  amount  of  mere  speculation  could  have  led. 


80  THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

Literature  as  well  as  law  caught  the  catholicity  of  tem- 
per. Velleius  Paterculus 1  ascribes  to  the  allies  in  the 
Social  War  a  '  causa  justissima!  Florus l  even  makes 
this  a  civil  war,  judging  Rome's  foes  to  be  of  Rome's 
own  blood,  a  thought  which  he  extends  to  all  the  races 
ruled  by  Augustus.  'The  whole  world  is  my  country,'  2 
cries  Seneca,  '  we  are  members  of  one  great  body  ;  na- 
ture made  us  relatives  when  she  begat  us  from  the  same 
material  and  for  the  same  destiny.'  Lucan  hails  that 
'  sacred  love  of  the  universe ' 3  which  makes  man  ■  re- 
gard himself  born  not  for  himself  but  for  the  whole 
world.'  Rome  is  exalted,  at  length  deified,4  as,  with  her 
now  catholic  extent  and  policy,  a  blessing  to  the  race. 
Conservative  Tacitus  tolerates  the  empire  for  the 
provinces'  sake.  The  elder  Pliny  admires  'the  im- 
mense majesty  of  that  Roman  peace,' 5  which  was  well- 
nigh  world-wide  and  unbroken  from  the  day  of  Actium 
to  the  death  of  Commodus,  223  years.  These  senti- 
ments were  not  partisan  or  doctrinaire,  but  pervaded 
the  public  heart. 

1  See  Velleius  Paterculus,  II,  15,  Florus,  III,  18:  Sociale  bellum  vocetur 
licet  ut  extenuimits  invidiam,  si  verum  tamen  volumus  Mud  civile 
bellum  fuit.  Paterculus  flourished  under  Tiberius  and  was  with  him  in 
his  German  campaign  against  Maroboduus,  6  B.C.  Florus  was  contem- 
porary with  Trajan  and  Hadrian.     Each  wrote  on  Roman  history. 

2  Epistles,  xxviii,  xcv;  cons,  ad  Helviam,  vi.  Seneca's  innumerable 
utterances  and  quotations  in  this  vein  show  conclusively  that  such  humani- 
tarianism  was  not  due  to  Christianity  alone.  Schmidt,  to  be  sure,  thinks 
Seneca  and  his  fellow  Stoics  to  have  been  greatly  influenced  by  Christianity 
without  knowing  it.  Better  Merivale's  thought,  '  that  the  law  of  Rome 
was  already  a  pedagogue,  leading  the  nations  unto  Christ  even  before  Christ 
Himself  had  appeared.' 

8  Pharsalia.     Lucan,  b.  39  A.D.,  was  Seneca's  nephew. 
4  Literally.     In  Smyrna  and  all  over  Asia  there  were  altars  to  Roma  as 
a  goddess.  —  Thierry,  266. 


THE   CLASSICAL   PERIOD  8 1 

*  Hist,  nat.,  xxvii,  I,  Aeternum,  quaeso,  deorum  sit  munus  istud, 
he  adds,  adeo  Rotnanos  velut  alteram  lucem  dedisse  rebus  humanis  m* 
videntur.  Contrary  to  a  very  common  fancy,  the  dominant  spirit  of  im- 
perial Rome  was  not  war  or  conquest.  The  greatest  Caesars  did  not  wish 
increase  of  territory,  and  waged  offensive  wars  only  to  secure  natural 
frontiers.  Trajan  was  the  sole  exception,  and  some  even  of  his  conquests, 
as  in  Dacia  and  Arabia,  had  a  defensive  aim.  The  effort  of  the  emperors  ■ 
was  to  break  down  the  barriers  between  peoples  within  the  empire,  and 
to  develop  a  homogeneous  civilization  for  the  entire  Roman  world.  — 
Thierry,  181  sq.;  Gibbon,  i.  '  If  an  angel  of  the  Lord  were  to  strike  the 
balance  whether  the  domain  ruled  by  Severus  Antoninus  was  governed 
with  the  greater  intelligence  and  humanity  then  or  now,  whether  civiliza- 
tion and  national  prosperity  generally  have  since  then  advanced  or  retro- 
graded, it  is  very  doubtful  whether  the  decision  would  prove  in  favor  of 
the  present.'  —  Mommsen,  Int.  to  Bk.  VIII. 


§  13     The  Municipium 

Kuhn,  Verfassung  der  rbmischen  Staedte.  Savigny,  Gesch.  des  romischen  Rechts 
im  Mittelalter,  I,  i,  ii.  Marquardt-Mommsen,  Romtsche  Altcrthunter,  IV,  26 
sqq.  Gitizot,  Essais  sur  Vhist.  de  France,  i.  Carl  Hegel,  St'ddteverfassung  von 
Italien. 

In  the  course  and  sequel  of  conquest  each  Roman 

\town  became  politically  a  copy  of  ancient  Rome  itself, 
curia  for  senate,  duumvir  for  consul.  From  the  be- 
ginning of  the  fifth  century  the  hereditary  curiales,1 
earlier  called  decuriones,  formed  a  not  narrow  property 
aristocracy,  with  some  honors  and  immunities,  which, 
as  the  empire  decayed,  were  more  than  outweighed  by  . 
burdens.  The  duumvir,2  elected  annually  by  the  cu-  - 
rials,  was  a  judicial  as  well  as  an  executive  functionary, 
a  court  of  first  instance  for  all  persons  and  causes  not 
specially  exempt  from  such  jurisdiction.  Besides  these 
there  were  several  other  municipal  officers,  foremost 
among  whom,  from  330,  was  the  defensor,  popularly3 
elected  each  five  years,  to  protect  individuals,  especially 


f 


82  THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD 


jjk    of  the  sub-curial  classes,  from  unjust  taxes  and  usage. 
]  The  defensor,  usually  the  bishop,  from  the  first  headed, 
at  length,  in  many  cases,  comprised,  the  government, 
the  rest  dissolving  in  poverty  and  anarchy.     Thus  the  v 
municipal  was  the  last  part  of  Rome's  political  fabric  toV 
fall.    Indeed,  it  seems  certain  that  at  least  its  spirit  and  ■  • 
general  form  never  succumbed,  and  that  more  or  fewer 
now  existing  French  and  Italian  communes  have  had  a 
nearly  unbroken  political  life  from  Roman  times.4 

1  Above  the  curials  stood  a  privileged  class,  exempt  from  taxation,  com- 
prising clergy,  soldiers,  senators  and  any  man  bearing  the  title  of  '  claris- 
simus '  [§  14,  n.  6].  Beneath  the  curials  were  the  common  people,  virtually 
serfs,  taxed,  but  destitute  of  political  rights.  It  required  but  25  jugera,  or 
about  10  acres,  of  land  to  constitute  one  a  curial.  A  curial  who  had  held 
all  the  offices  of  his  city  passed  into  the  privileged  class.  To  certain 
degrading  penalties  also  curials  were  not  liable.  For  their  burdens,  and 
much  else,  see  Ch.  IV,  §  5. 

2  Sometimes  two  \duumviri\  or  even  four  \_quattuorviri\.  They  were 
often  called  '  consuls,'  as  curials  were  '  senators '  and  curia  '  senate.'  A 
defensor  served  5  years  till  Justinian,  then  2.  No  curial  could  be  defensor. 
Other  full  officers  were  the  censors,  also  called  quinquenales.  They  were 
commissioners  of  public  buildings,  lands  and  moneys.  Aediles  and  quaes- 
tors are  mentioned.  As  holding  munera  or  lower  offices,  the  susceptor 
[tax-collector],  the  irenarchs  [chiefs  of  police],  the  scribae  or  excerptores, 
and  various  sorts  of  curatores,  as  frumentarii,  calendarii,  etc.,  may  be 
named. 

3  I.e.,  the  clergy  and  the  sub-curial  freemen  as  well  as  the  curials  helped 
elect  him.  His  function  was  analogous  to  the  earlier  one  of  the  tribunes. 
Many  defensors  became  counts  of  their  cities.  Being  a  magistrate  a 
defensor  might  take  the  place  of  a  provincial  governor  in  his  absence. 
He  was  authorized  also  to  carry  complaints  directly  to  the  praetorian  pre- 
fect [$  14].  Beneath  the  sub-curial  free  but  by  an  interval  small  and  ever 
lessening  were  slaves. 

4  Savigny,  as  above,  I,  iv;  Guizot,  Civilization  in  France,  Lect.  xi; 
Duruy,  Moyen  Age,  274,  335;  Kaufmann,  deutsche  Geseh.,  II,  177,  413. 
Rome,  Aix,  Marseilles,  Aries,  Nismes,  Narbonne  and  Toulouse  are  the 
clearest  cases  of  continuity.     In  questioning,  or  minimizing,  such  continu- 

V 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  83 

ity  Carl  Hegel  stands  nearly  alone.     '  Dux '  became  '  doge  '  in  No.  Italy 
[not  alone  at  Venice],  as,  in  So.  Italy,  <rTparriy6s  in  the  form  '  stradigo '  has 
come  down  to  quite  recent  times.     In  Italian,  '  dogdna '  is  still  the  name 
for    custom-house.      Rome's   public   dirt-carts   are   to   this    day   marked  \ 
I  S.P.Q.R. 

§   14    The  Imperial  Organization    \s 

Gibbon,  iii,  xvii,  Freeman,  in  Contemp.  Rev.,  Nov.,  1884.  Marqtiardt-Mommsen, 
IV.  Thierry,  Tableau,  Livre  II.  Duruy,  Moyeti  Age,  ch.  i.  Carl  Hock,  R. 
Gesch.  voni  Verfall  d.  Rep.  bis  zn  Vollendung  d.  Monarchic  unter  Constantin, 
I.     Guizot,  Civilization  in  France,  Vol.  Ill,  203  sqq.     Kuhn,  Verf,  d.  roMi.  Reichs. 

This  splendid  and  colossal  mechanism,  without  un- 
derstanding which  no  chapter  of  mediaeval  history  is 
clear,  was  perfected  by  slow  degrees,  mainly  by  Hadrian, 
Diocletian  and  Constantine.  The  empire,  however 
divided,  was  to  the  last  a  unit  in  theory.1  Kingdoms 
once  '  confederate  '  or  '  allied  ' 2  with  Rome,  gradually 
became  proyinces,  and  in  these  the  distinction  between 
senatorial  and  imperial  passed  away.  Under  and  after 
Diocletian,  the  empire  was  divided  into  four  prefec- 
tures,3 each  with  its  prefect,  to  whom,  as  to  the  whole 
administration  of  the  government,  Constantine  imparted 
a  purely  civil  character.  Prefectures  fell  asunder, 
much  according  to  old  national  lines,  into  dioceses,  of 
which,  including  the  independent  dioceses  of  Rome  and 
Constantinople,  there  were  fifteen.  Each  diocese  had 
its  vice-prefect,  and  was  composed  of  provinces.  These, 
too,  had  presidents,  under  whom,  again,  stood  the  mag- 
istrates of  cities  and  villages.  A  similar  hierarchy  pre- 1 
vailed  in  the  army.  Seven  grand  officers  formed  the 
imperial  cabinet.4  Each  head  of  a  prefecture,  diocese 
or  province  had  his  numerous  staff  of  aides,  the  chief 
functions  of  these  being  to  hold  courts  and  to  collect 
revenues.     Noble  roads  and  a  swift  post  connected  the 


A 

^ 


84  THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

capitals  with  the  extreme  provinces.5  While  consuls 
and  senate  had  in  both  capitals  assumed  a  merely  mu- 
nicipal function,  holders  present  or  past  of  high  admin- 
istrative positions  formed  a  new  nobility,  with  rigorously 
determined  etiquette,  privilege  and  honors.6 

1  I.e.,  when  there  were  two  emperors,  each  had  his  full  authority  every- 
where. Hock  is  especially  good  on  the  constitution  under  Augustus.  Peter 
has  leaned  heavily  on  him. 

2  Both  these  kinds  of  states  retained  the  forms  of  freedom,  but  the  con- 
federate had  the  more  of  its  substance.  The  senate  could  at  any  time 
write  to  an  ally,  as  Augustus  to  Herod :  '  So  far  you  have  ranked  among 
my  friends,  henceforth  I  make  you  my  servant.'  —  Thierry,  Tab.,  50.  Cf. 
Marquardt-Mommsen  as  above,  44  sqq. 

8  Gaul,  Italy,  Illyricum,  and  the  East.  See  Map.  On  the  prefectures, 
Constantine's  change  of  the  prefect  from  a  military  to  a  civil  officer,  etc., 
Gibbon,  xvii,  and  Freeman,  Hist'l  Geog.,  76  sqq.  To  be  noticed  that  the 
diocese  Illyricum  was  not  in  the  prefecture  of  that  name.  The  dioceses 
Thrace  and  Constantinople  were  in  the  prefecture  of  the  East.  This  word 
:  '  diocese '  passed  from  civil  into  ecclesiastical  use,  as  did  '  consistorium? 
the  word  for  the  emperor's  cabinet.     So  '  ordo.' 

*  See  for  this  and  all  that  follows,  Gibbon,  ch.  xvii. 

5  Friedlander,  Sitiengesch.  Roms,  Th.  II,  i,  Die  Reisen.     Gibbon,  ch.  i, 

ii.     Caesarius,  in  Theodosius's  t.,  journeyed  fr.  Antioch  to  Constantinople,    / 
665  miles,  in  about  6%  days.    It  was  not  unusual  to  travel  100  miles  a  day.N/ 

< Tiberius  even  went  from  Rome  to  what  is  now  Holland  at  the  average  rate 
of  nearly  12  miles  an  hour.  On  the  death  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  at  London, 
Thursday  morning,  Men.  24,  1603,  Sir  Rob.  Cary  galloped  for  Holyrood 
to  inform  King  James.     The  distance  is  about  350  miles.     It  has  been 

< thought  a  wonder  that  he  arrived  Saturday  night.     The  Roman  empire 
at  its  greatest  extent  was  about  3000  miles  long  by  2000  wide.     From  th& 
wall  of  Antonine  in  Britain  across  the  empire  in  a  southeast  direction  to 
Jerusalem  was  about  3740  miles.     On  the  populousness  of  the  emp.,  Wie- 
tersheim,  Bevolkerung  d.  rom.  Reichs.    Ace.  to  Dionysius,  the  arms-bearing  \ 
Romans  at  time  of  Servius  Tullius  numbered  80,700;   at  beginning  of  Re-    \ 
public,  150,000;   at  end  of  I  Punic  War,  300,000;   under  AugustuSjj^ry,-    / 
000 ;   under  Claudian,  6,940,000. 

6  The  last  consul,  541  A.D.,  1294  v.c,  was  Flavi'us  Basilius  Junior.  The 
senate  came  to  an  end  11  years  later,  552.  —  Asbach,  Zur  Gesch.  d.  Con- 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  85 

sulats  in  d.  romischen  Kaiserzeit.  On  this  new  nobility,  Gibbon,  ch.  xvii. 
There  were  the  illnstres  [most  noble],  the  spcctabiles  [right  honorable],  and 
the  clarissimi  [honorable]. 


§  15     Rise  of  Christianity 

Gibbon,  xv,  xvi,  xx,  xxi.  Milman,  Bks.  I,  II.  Ranke,  Weltgesch.  Theil  III,  v. 
Schlegel,  Philos.  of  Hist.,  ch.  x.  Hegel,  do.,  Pt.  Ill,  III,  ii.  Lotze,  Mikrokosmus, 
VII,  v.     Cf.  bibliog.  to  this  Chapter,  iii. 

While    political    Rome   went    down,    the    Christian 
church  with  incomparable  vigor  was  daily  gaining  con- 
verts, perfecting  organization,  creating  its  mighty  fu- 
ture.     By  the  time  of  Trajan  North  Asia  Minor  has 
Christians  everywhere.1     Soon  after  150  the  empire  is 
studded  with  churches,  a  few  existing  even  in  Arabia, 
Persia  and  India.     At  first  chiefly  the  poor,  in  the  third 
century  higher  classes  also,  embrace  the  gospel.     It  in- 
fluences the  court  itself.2     Its  mode  of  progress  is  from  \ 
cities  outward  into    hamlets    and    country,   mainly  by    ) 
natural  contact  of  men,  also  through  formal  missions.3  / 
Constantine's    politic    change   of    attitude    toward    the 
church,  while  vastly  increasing  the  number  of  nominal 
believers,  was  less  itself  a  victory  for  Christianity  than  N 
a  proof  of  the  victory  which  this  had  already  won.     The. 
church,   though  not  yet  in  numerical  majority,4  repre- 
sented whatever  was  best  in  society,  its  living,  aggres- 
sive, practical  and  moral  elements.5    Majority  came  soon, 
but  meant  less  than  one  wishes  it  had.     Thus,  the  elec- 

<tion,  in  366,  of  a  bishop  of  Rome,  at  once  involves  and 
disgraces  the  whole  population  of  the  city.6  Also  the 
evanescence  of  heathenism  from  this  time,  results  in 
considerable  part  from  fashion  and  policy.  Yet  real 
Christianity  still  spread,  and  the  church's  progress  even 


86  THE   CLASSICAL   PERIOD 

after  Constantine  is  nowise  merely  ecclesiastical.  The 
sufficient  cause  of  such  conquest  by  Christianity  was 
that  it  was  a  true  religion,  answering  the  deepest  intel- 
lectual, moral  and  spiritual  needs  of  souls.  Con-causes 
were  (i)  the  excellent  examples  of  Christians,  (2)  their 
care  of  the  poor  and  helpless,  pagan  as  well  as  Chris- 
tian," (3)  the  apologies  and  preaching  of  their  ablest 
clergy,  (4)  persecutions,8  nursing  the  heroic  spirit  in 
Christians  themselves,  sympathy  in  others,  (5)  unity  of 
the  Roman  world  in  language,  also  through  facile  travel 
and  communication,  (6)  unmeant  cooperation  of  Stoi- 
cism and  Platonism.9 

1  We  know  this  from  the  highly  interesting  correspondence  between 
Trajan  and  Pliny  the  Younger,  who  was  propraetor  in  Pontus,  I03~'5.  — 
Pliny's  Letters,  X,  97,  98.  Ebers's  '  Emperor '  offers  an  impressive  and 
truthful  picture  of  Christianity  in  Egypt  in  Hadrian's  time,  117- 138. 

2  Marcia,  the  favorite  concubine  of  Commodus,  was  favorable  to  the 
Christians.  —  Milman,  ch.  i.  Philippians,  IV,  22,  probably  refers  only  to 
servants  and  retainers.  Some  early  bishops  were  slaves.  Till  3d  cent., 
the  Roman  ch.  was  composed  of  '  rudes  et  impoliti."1 

8  Almost  solely  within  the  lines  of  the  empire.  Christian  archaeology 
reveals  that  missionaries  rarely  if  ever  went  in  advance  of  the  eagles.  On 
early  British  Christianity,  however,  see  Ch.  V,  §  1.  The  Goths  were  chris- 
tianized by  Christian  captives.  —  Neander,  Ch.  Hist.,  II,  I25~'9. 

*  Tacitus,  xv,  44,  calls  them  an  ingens  multitudo  in  Nero's  time.  About 
250,  Christians  may  have  numbered  J$  of  the  supposed  million  inhabitants 
of  Rome.  Their  church  had  1  bishop,  46  presbyters,  7  deacons,  7  sub- 
deacons,  42  acolyths,  50  readers,  exorcists,  and  porters,  and  1500  bene- 
ficiaries, i.e.,  widows,  sick  and  poor.  —  Eusebius,  vi  43.  About  400  the 
ch.  of  Antioch  embraced  100,000  souls  [3000  of  them  beneficiaries], 
probably  about  A  the  city's  population. 

5  Not  likely  that  Constantine  meant  to  profess  conversion.  He  simply 
substituted  a  better  for  a  poorer  state-religion.  He  was,  of  course,  the 
head  of  the  new  as  previously  of  the  old.  Rome  had  always  made  relig- 
ion a  state  affair,  and  the  promotion  of  Christianity  caused  no  change  in 
this.  I.e.,  Dante's  state-church  theory  [Ch.  V,  §  11]  was  identical  with 
that  of  the  Roman  Republic. 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  8? 

6  Milman,  I,  ii.  Damasus  the  successful  candidate  was  opposed  by 
Ursicinus.  Churches  were  garrisoned,  besieged,  stormed,  deluged  with 
blood.  The  prefect  could  not  keep  the  peace.  In  the  basilica  of  Sisinniu? 
one  day  over  130  dead  bodies  were  counted. 

7  Uhlhorn,  Christian  Charity  in  the  Anc.  Ch.  Cf.  next  §,  also  Ebers, 
•  Emperor.' 

8  Persecutions  of  Christians  were  partly  popular  and  unauthorized,  the 
heathen  populace  believing  them  to  be  aOeoi,  haters  of  the  gods,  and  so 
authors  of  tempests,  plagues,  etc.,  and  partly  from  regular  legal  prosecution. 
The  crimen,  contrary  to  what  has  usually  been  thought,  was  rarely,  if  ever, 
that  of  adhering  to  a  religio  illiciia,  for  to  all  such  Rome  was  most  tole- 
rant, but  that  of  laesa  majestas,  or  treason,  in  not  paying  homage  to  the 
emperors.  But  membership  in  an  illicit  collegium  or  attachment  to  an 
illicit  religion  was  often  used  in  evidence.  That  the  Christians  commonly 
met  in  secret  was  special  ground  of  suspicion  against  them. 

9  See  Merivale,  Conversion  of  Rom.  Emp.,  Lect.  v. 


§   16     Its  Influence 

Merivale,  Conversion  of  the  Roman  Empire.  Sidgwick,  '  Ethics,'  in  Encyc.  Brit,  [also 
in  sep.  vol.].  Schmidt,  Essai  sur  societe  dans  le  monde  romain  et  sa  transfor- 
mation par  le  Christianisme  [Paris,  1853].  von  Sybel,  Kleine  hist.  Schriften, 
L»- 

'Without  dwelling  on  the  immense  impetus  given  to 
the  practice  of  social  duty  generally,  by  the  religion 
that  made  beneficence  a  form  of  divine  service  and 
identified  piety  with  pity,  we  have  to  put  down  as  defi- 
nite changes  introduced  by  Christianity  into  the  current 
moral  view,  (i)  the  severe  condemnation  and  final  sup- 
pression of  the  practice  of  exposing  infants,  (2)  effective 
abhorrence  of  the  barbarism  of  gladiatorial  combats,1 
(3)  immediate  moral  mitigation  of  slavery  and  a  strong 
encouragement  of  emancipation,2  (4)  great  extension  of 
the  eleemosynary  provision  made  for  the  sick  and  the 
poor.'  While  cosmopolitan  spirit  and  belief  in  human 
unity  are  partly  due  to  Stoicism  and  to  Roman  experi- 


88  THE   CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

ence  of  the  world,  Christianity  was  beyond  question 
their  chief  spring  and  strength.  The  increase  from 
Gaius  to  Justinian,  of  humanity  and  of  reverence  for 
natural  ties  in  laws  of  marriage  and  succession,  points 
likewise  to  Christianity.3  The  idea  of  progress  must 
be  credited  to  Christianity  exclusively.  Cicero's,  Lu- 
cretius's,  Seneca's,  Aurelius's  works  will  be  searched  in 
vain  '  for  a  single  expression  of  reliance  on  the  progres- 
sive improvement  of  mankind.'  It  is  another  of  Chris- 
tianity's rare  merits  to  have  supplied  that  union  of 
practical  with  ideal  aims,  at  once  so  attractive  and  so 
elevating  to  the  Roman,  which  made  Rome,  centuries 
long,  the  efficient  moral  and  religious  centre  of  Europe. 

1  Friedlander,  Sittengesch.  Roms,  Th.  II,  ii. 

2  The  lex  Cornelia  dc  sicariis,  under  Sulla,  8i  B.C.,  made  the  killing  of 
another  man's  slave  homicide.  Antoninus  Pius,  138-161,  placed  in  the 
same  category  the  causeless  killing  of  one's  own.  —  Justinian,  Inst.,  I,  viii. 
The  same  benign  prince  ordained  that  masters  who  were  cruel  to  their 
slaves  should  be  forced  to  sell  them,  *  for  the  public  weal  demands  that  no 
one  wrongfully  use  his  property.'  The  code  of  Justinian,  534,  shows  but 
little  advance  upon  the  above  in  mercy  toward  slaves.  It,  however,  en- 
joins masters  to  send  sick  and  worn-out  slaves  to  the  public  hospitals, 
which  were  now  open  to  them  as  to  the  poor  free.  Manumission  also  had 
been  made  easier.  Cf.  The  Early  Ch.  and  Slavery,  in  Lea's  Studies.  The 
church  scrupled  not  to  hold  slaves  upon  its  lands  or  to  preach  to  them 
submission  and  industry,  but  it  exhorted  masters  to  mercy  and  proclaimed 
emancipation,  especially  by  bishops  and  monasteries,  as  a  species  of  pious 
act  especially  pleasing  to  God.  Yet,  on  the  whole,  Christianity's  action 
against  slavery,  considering  its  long  power  as  a  state  religion,  must  be 
pronounced  very  slow. 

3  Morey,  Roman  Law,  149  sqq.,  admirably  discusses  this.  Constantine 
made  it  murder  for  a  father  to  kill  his  son.  Giving  a  son  in  adoption  re- 
quired the  son's  consent.  A  son,  if  a  soldier,  could  hold  the  fee  simple 
of  property.  Women  too  could  do  this.  They  could  adopt  children, 
could  be  guardians  of  their  children  and  were  no  longer  compelled  to  be 
under  tutelage. 


the  classical  period  89 

§  17     Early  Church  Organization 

Hatch,  Organization  of  the  Early  Christian  Churches.  Lightfoot,  Dissertation  on  tha 
Christian  Ministry,  in  Commentary  on  Philippians.  Andrews,  in  Bibliotheca  Sacra, 
Jan.,  1883. 

In  the  earliest  ecclesiastical  polity  each  town  or  city 
had  but  a  single  church,  with  its  board  of  coequal 
bishop-elders.  The  function  of  these  was  service  rather 
than  office,  oversight  instead  of  preaching.  By  natural 
steps  eldership  became  an  office  proper,  and  the  head- 
ship of  the  board  passed  to  an  individual,  who  was  at 
first  mere  primus  inter  pares,  then  veritable  monarch. 
Soon,  converts  multiplying,  every  large  church  comes 
to  comprise  several  congregations,  each  with  its  elder 
or  elders ;  and  the  bishop  finds  himself  the  head  of  a 
parish-diocese,  enlarged  in  most  cases  by  mission 
churches,  which  his  has  planted  in  the  suburbs  or  be- 
yond.1 The  analogy  of  this  relation,  and  the  example 
of  the  civil  provincial  regime,  especially  after  the  rise  of 
provincial  synods,  brought  among  bishops  themselves, 
preeminence  to  those  of  provincial  and  diocesan  capi- 
tals. Like  causes  advanced  to  still  higher  dignity  the 
bishops  of  churches  founded  by  apostles  2  or  otherwise 
specially  eminent.  The  bishops  of  Alexandria,  An- 
tioch,  Ephesus,  Corinth  and  Rome,  later  also  the  patri- 
arch of  Constantinople,  \iad  this  supreme  rank.  These 
exalted  fathers  call  diocesan  councils,  consecrate  met- 
ropolitans 3  and  judge  as  courts  of  last  instance.  Such 
tendency  toward  centralization  and  firm  organization  in 
the  church  was  furthered  by  (i)  scriptural  teachings 
and  analogies,4  (2)  the  influence  and  teaching  of  great 
doctors,  (3)  frequent  synods  5  and  councils,  (4)  the  spec* 


90  THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

tacle  of  the  empire,  (5)  fiery  opposition  on  the  part  of 
heretics  and  pagans. 

1  Not  till  the  3d  century  do  we  find  x^P*'^*0*"0'  or  bishops  of  coun- 
try villages,  independent  of  city  bishops.  Churches  in  small  centres,  even 
when  started  independently,  usually  connected  themselves  with  large  ones. 

2  Ecclesia  apostolica  matrix  ecclesiae  was  a  proverb. 

8  The  church  of  a  provincial  capital  [as  also  its  bishop]  was  called 
metropolitan,  ecclesia  primae  sedis,  in  relation  to  the  other  churches  of 
the  province.  In  a  word,  the  political  organization  [§  14]  was  the  schema 
for  the  ecclesiastical,  the  two  exactly  coinciding,  except  where  a  political 
capital  chanced  to  be  moved  after  the  bishop's  seat  had  become  well  fixed. 
Even  in  such  cases,  the  bishop  of  the  new  capital  sometimes  received  pro- 
motion, as  Patroclus  of  Aries,  in  417,  Aries  having  been  made  capital  of 
Gaul  in  400.  But  Hilary,  Patroclus's  successor,  was  degraded  again  by 
Pope  Leo  I. 

4  In  what  sense  episcopacy  is  of  scriptural  authority,  see  Lightfoot,  as 
above.  The  Jewish  church  and  the  unity  ascribed  by  the  N.  T.  to  the 
churches  of  the  Jerusalem  circle  offered  influential  analogies. 

6  When,  by  200,  the  synodal  system  had  become  established,  each 
metropolitan  used  to  convoke  his  clergy  yearly,  soon  after  Easter. 

§  18     Rise  of  the  Papacy 

Milman,  bks.  i,  ii.  Kaufmann,  deutsche  Gesch.,  II,  235  sqq.  Creighton,  Hist,  of 
Papacy  during  Reformation,  ch.  i.  Wattenbach,  Gesch.  d.  riimischen  Papstthums. 
[All  the  Church  Histories  have  chapters  on  this.] 

Plainly  such  a  system  logically  called  for  an  individual 
centre.  This  it  found  in  the  bishop  of  Rome.  The 
church  of  the  imperial  capital,  the  sole  apostolic  see  in 
the  West,  upon  soil  sanctified  by  the  blood  of  holy 
apostles  and  martyrs,  had  from  its  foundation  been 
highly  respected  and  influential  in  all  sections  of  Chris- 
tendom. Yet  its  bishop  became  sovereign  only  after 
long  evolution  of  opinion.  The  process  comprised 
three  periods  :!  i  A  headship  in  honor  and  rank  is  uni- 
versally accorded    him  in  the  way  of   comity.2     ii  He 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  91 

claims  supreme  authority  as  a  right,  against  opposers.3 
iii  Admission  of  this  right  becomes  universal  through- 
out the  West  as  essential  to  orthodox  belief.  Tributary 
to  this  tremendous  result  were  (i)  the  size,  wealth, 
orthodoxy,  liberality  and  missionary  zeal  of  the  Roman 
church,  (2)  reverence  for  Rome  and  the  analogy  of  the 
monarchical  empire,  (3)  the  theory  of  Peter's  primacy 
and  of  the  transmission  of  the  same,4  (4)  the  influence 
of  the  Roman  bishop  at  court  when  this  was  at  Rome, 
(5)  his  power  as  virtually  civil  ruler  when  the  court  was 
at  Ravenna  or  Constantinople,5  (6)  his  function  as,  in  a 
way,  appellate  JU.d^e,  recognized  and  confirmed  by  the 
CounciTof  Sardica  (343), 6  (7)  the  doctrine  of  the  church 
as  the  supreme  earthly  power,  shaped  and  furthered  by 
Augustine's  City  of  God,7  (8)  the  passage,  about  400, 
of  the  church's  intellectual  headship  from  the  East  to 
the  West.8  Already  Siricius  (384-98)  expects  his  de- 
cretal to  be  obeyed  by  all.  Innocent  I  (402-16)  will 
have  all  the  bishops  on  earth  apply  to  Saint  Peter  for 
light  upon  matters  of  faith.  These  encountered  some 
resistance.  It  was  reserved  for  Leo  the  Great  (440-'6i), 
eloquent  preacher,  conqueror  of  Attila  by  a  look,  saviour 
of  Italy  from  the  Huns,  far  the  ablest  church  leader 
that  Rome  had  yet  seen,  properly  to  found  the  papal 
power  as  known  to  history,  crushing  all  vigorous  oppo- 
sition. He  dictated  the  law  of  Valentinian  III  (445) 
which  recognized  the  Roman  see  as  the  supreme  legis- 
lative and  judicial  authority  for  the  entire  church,  and 
at  Chalcedon  (451)  his  legates  presided,  absolving  and 
condemning  in  his  name. 

1  Comba,  Storia  della  Ri forma  in  Italia,  I,  Int.  [Florence,  1881],  re- 
counts well  the  development  of  the  papacy,  the  various  efforts  at  reform 
and  the  whole  early  hist,  of  Ch'ty  in  Italy. 


92  THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

2  As  the  archbishops  of  Armagh  and  St.  Andrews  for  centuries  before 
England  became  Great  Britain  deferred  to  him  of  Canterbury.  The  second 
ecumenical  council,  Constantinople,  so  late  as  381,  expressly  declared  the 
bishop  of  Constantinople  to  be  the  peer  in  rank  with  him  of  Rome. 
Cyprian,  bishop  of  Carthage,  died  258.  With  extreme  zeal  and  ability  he 
defended  the  Roman  bishop's  primacy  in  rank.  With  equal  energy,  how- 
ever, he  maintained  that  in  authority,  right  and  power  all  bishops  are 
equal.  To  him  the  primacy  of  Peter  even  was  only  one  of  rank  and  gave 
him  no  power  over  his  apostolic  colleagues.  Cyprian  calls  the  bishop  of 
Rome  '  brother '  and  '  colleague.'  He  disagrees  with  Stephen  of  Rome  as 
to  the  validity  of  heretical  baptism.  Stephen  refuses  him  communion  and 
denounces  him  as  a  heretic.  Yet  this  nowise  affected  Cyprian's  ecclesiasti- 
cal status,  and  the  church  honors  him  to-day  as  a  saint. 

3  Rome's  claims  kept  far  in  advance  of  acquiescence  in  them.  Cyprian 
in  his  controversy  with  Stephen  translates  a  letter  from  Firmilian.  bishop 
of  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  which  denounces  Stephen  as  an  audacious  and 
insolent  heretic,  and  scoffs  at  his  pretended  descent  from  St.  Peter.  Eighty- 
seven  bishops  assembled  in  council  at  Carthage  under  Cyprian,  asserted 
the  independence  of  the  African  churches,  and  condemned  the  assumption 
by  any  bishop,  Roman  or  other,  of  the  title  '  bishop  of  bishops.'  When 
in  the  Decian  persecution  the  bishops  of  Leon  and  Astorga  in  Spain  had 
lapsed,  yet  were  defended  by  Stephen,  Cyprian,  with  thirty-five  other  bishops, 
ratified  their  condemnation,  and  bade  the  churches  of  Leon  and  Astorga 
cling  to  the  new  bishops  whom  they  had  meantime  chosen.  Ambrose, 
Augustine  and  Sulpicius  Severus,  the  historian,  held  fast  to  this  view  of 
episcopal  coequality. 

*  Based  upon  Matt,  xvi,  18:  'Thou  art  Tlerpos,  and  upon  this  Wrpa 
will  I  build  my  church.'  Each  pope  is  supposed  to  be  crowned  directly 
over  St.  Peter's  grave.  The  papal  crown  was  made  triple  by  John  XXIII, 
who  added  a  third  coronet  in  141 1. 

5  This  influence  and  power  were  vast  long  before  Ch'ty  became  the 
state  religion,  but  greater,  of  course,  after.  Thus,  when  the  Donatists 
appeal  to  Constantine,  he  turns  the  matter  over  at  once  to  Pope  Miltiades. 
—  de  Broglie,  I,  ii. 

6  Any  bishop  condemned  by  a  provincial  council  might  appeal  to  the 
Roman  bishop.  If  the  latter  thought  a  new  trial  deserved,  he  referred  the 
case  to  a  council  in  another  province.  Sardica  [which  was  not  a  general 
council  at  all]  gave  him  only  this  right  to  order  a  new  trial,  not  that  of 
final  judgment. 

7  As  Constantine's  theory  of  the  church  was  one  with  Dante's  [§  15,  n.  5], 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  93 

Augustine's  was  the  early  form  of  Gregory  VII's  [Ch.  V,  §  12].    The  state 
is  nothing,  save  for  the  church.      The  emperor  must  serve  the  church.     / 
If  he  refuses,  he  is  no  better  than  a  great  robber. 

8  Represented  esp.  by  Ambrose,  340-397;   Jerome,  340-420;   and  Au- 
gustine, 354-430.     These  men  repudiated  Rorne!s  jural  primacy,  but  by     \ 
jplea  with  their  insistence  upon  the  church  s  unity  and 


their  greatness,  couj! 
supremacy,  they  mightily  aided  Rome  in  securing  such.  Intellectually  in- 
dependent, the  West  felt  no  lack  when  the  East  drew  off,  and  in  the  West 
no  church  could  vie  with  that  of  Rome  for  first  place.  Carthage  might  \ 
have  thought  of  this  but  for  Vandal  ravages.  Indeed,  pressed  by  the  Arian 
and  heathen  Teutons,  the  churches  of  Gaul,  Spain  and  Africa  were  fain 
to  crave  help  from  Rome,  instead  of  defying  her.  And  by  this  time  Rome 
meant  the  church  of  Rome.     Cf.  Chapter  IV,  §  19. 


§  19    Theological  Controversy 

Milman,    bks.    i-iii.      Gibbon,  xx,  xxi,  xlvii.     Sheldon,  Hist,  of  Christian  Doctrine. 
Hagenbach,  do.     Shedd,  do.     Neander,  Church  Hist.,  II. 

In  no  way  more  than  through  this  has  the  early 
church  shaped  modern  thinking.  The  head  subjects 
of  difference  were  three,  mainly  affecting,  the  first  two 
the  West,  the  third  the  East  :  i  Grace  and  Free-will. 
Pelagius  declared  man's  will  free  after,  Augustine,  en- 
slaved through,  Adam's  fall.  Pelagius  thought  grace 
only  an  aid  to,  Augustine,  the  cause  of,  all  holy  human 
volition.  Augustine  was  victorious  at  the  time  though 
final  orthodoxy  much  modified  his  views,  ii  The  Na- 
ture of  the  Church.  1  The  Novatianists  mercilessly  ex- 
cluded penitent  lapsi}  2  The  Donatists,  an  African 
sect,  conditioned  valid  priestly  functioning  upon  per- 
sonal worthiness  in  the  priest.  They  waged  against 
the  catholics  a  long,  truceless  and  bloody  war.  iii  The 
Nature  of  Christ.  1  Within  himself.  Nestorius,  sharp- 
ly sundering  human  from  divine,  gave  Christ  a  double 
personality.     Eutyches  and  the  Monophysites,2  the  lat- 


94  THE   CLASSICAL    PERIOD 

ter  a  sect  long  powerful  in  the  East,  went  to  the  oppo- 
site extreme,  losing  his  humanity  in  his  divinity.  2  In 
relation  to  the  Father.  MonarcJiianism  was  a  professed 
special  defence  of  God's  unity,  having  many  variant 
phases,  all  of  which  agreed  in  the  subordination  of  the 
Son.3  Substantially  the  same  heresy  though  far  more 
definite,  earnest  and  influential,  shaking  Christendom  to 
its  base,  was  Arianism,  esteeming  Christ  a  creature, 
yet  in  virtue  of  his  higher  nature,  superhuman,  creator 
of  the  world  and  worthy  of  divine  worship.  The  con- 
trary view,  making  Christ's  higher  nature  eternal,  un- 
create  and  in  the  fullest  sense  divine,  entered  the  creed 
at  Nicaea,  325,  yet  like  Athanasius  its  indomitable  de- 
fender, had  to  wait  and  fight  long  for  general  recogni- 
tion as  from  God.4 

1  Those,  that  is,  who  had  in  some  way  made  terms  with  the  persecuting 
authorities,  as  by  surrendering  the  sacred  scriptures,  burning  incense  to 
the  emperor,  or  sacrificing  to  the  heathen  gods.  Cf.  §  15,  n.  8.  Novatian 
was  a  presbyter  at  Rome,  whence  his  doctrine  spread  to  all  parts  of  the 
church.  Novatianists  refused  communion  with  catholic  Christians,  and 
rebaptized  converts  from  them.  Severe  as  they  were  they  did  not  deny  to 
the  lapsed  hope  of  mercy  in  another  life.  Substantially  the  same  idea  of 
the  true  church  as  a  holy  community  [fcaflapoi]  inspired  the  Donatists. 
The  catholic  party,  on  the  other  hand,  took  a  broad  church  attitude. 

2  Eutyches  was  condemned  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  451.  His 
followers  were  especially  numerous  in  Egypt.  They  were  wont  to  call 
Mary  the  mother  of  God,  and  to  say  that  God  suffered  on  the  cross  [patri- 
passianism].  This  shocked  Nestorius  as  veritable  heathenism.  Cyril  of 
Alexandria  took  up  arms  against  Nestorius,  virtually  denying  Christ's 
human  nature.  He  won  the  Roman  bishop  by  making  Nestorius's  view 
appear  Pelagian.  Monothelitism  in  the  7th  century,  teaching  that  Christ 
possessed  two  natures  but  only  a  single  will,  was  an  attempt  to  mediate 
in  this  controversy. 

8  Sabellianism  was  the  most  popular  form  of  this  heresy.  Advocates  of 
fiovapxia,  or  the  singleness  of  the  divine  essence,  admitted  the  divinity  and 
uncreatedness  of  Christ's  higher  nature,  but  denied  its  separate  personality 
before  his  human  birth. 


THE    CLASSICAL    PERIOD  95 

4  For  a  century  and  more  it  was  doubtful  whether  Arianism  would  not 
become  accepted  as  orthodoxy.  Several  emperors  were  Arians.  The  tragic 
story  of  '  Athanasins  contra  mundum '  may  be  read  in  any  of  the  Church 
Histories.     Cf.  J.  H.  Newman,  Arians  of  the  4th  Century. 

§  20    Other  Influence  of  the  Church 

Gibbon,  as  at  §  19.    Lea  [Studies  in  Ch.  Hist.],  '  Benefit  of  Clergy,'  '  Rise  of  Temporal 
Power,'  and  '  Excommunication.'    Milman,  III,  v. 

Highly  noteworthy  was  the  church's  function  in 
(1)  producing  great  men,1  (2)  importing  monachism,2 
(3)  enforcing  clerical  celibacy,3  (4)  enacting  creeds  and 
discipline,4  (5)  perpetuating  elements  of  heathenism.5 
Further,  the  church  assumed  momentous  relations  with 
the  empire.  It  drew  emperors  into  its  quarrels,  invok- 
ing the  civil  arm  against  heretics,  thus  painfully  sub- 
jecting itself  to  the  secular  power.  Emperors  listened 
to  appeals  from  bishops'  courts,  held  councils,  at  which 
they  or  their  delegates  presided,  and  gave  to  conciliar 
decrees  the  force  of  imperial  laws.  Imperial  influence  \ 
in  deciding  what  was  orthodoxy,  and  in  appointing  to 
ecclesiastical  offices  induced,  especially  in  the  East, 
great  servility  in  the  higher  clergy.  In  return  church 
invaded  state.  The  right  of  asylum  passed  from  a  few 
temples  to  all  churches,  dreadfully  interfering  with  jus-  i 
tice.  The  clergy  as  a  class  became  by  far  the  strongest 
power  in  the  empire.  They  could  discipline  exalted 
wrong-doers  who  defied  civil  process.  They  regulated 
legislation  and  practice  in  respect  to  marriage,  divorce 
and  bequests.  No  civil  court  could  try  a  clerk.6  The  *"/  * ' 
bishop  everywhere  administered  the  wealth,  often  im-  (*4 
mense,  of  his  church,  practically  as  if  his  own.  In  the 
new  kingdoms  he  was  the  superior,  associate  and  ad- 


g6  THE   CLASSICAL   PERIOD 

viser  of  the  victors,  the  advocate  and  friend  of  the  van- 
quished. As  defensor,  a  civil  officer,  he  stood  for  Rome 
long  after  all  other  visible  elements  of  the  old  society 
had  vanished.  This  double  character  made  him  incal- 
culably influential  in  conserving  Roman  laws  and  cus- 
toms during  their  stormy  passage  into  the  life  of  the 
new  states  of  the  West. 

i1  Ecclesiastical  promotion  took  the  place  of  secular  as  an  object  of 
ambition.  Besides  Ambrose,  Jerome  and  Augustine,  those  living  wholly 
or  partly  in  the  5th  century  alone  would  make  a  long  list.  Chrysostom, 
Innocent  I,  Pelagius,  Nestorius,  Leo  I,  Gregory  of  Nazianzen,  Gregory  of 
Nyssa  and  Hilary  were  all  extraordinary  men. 

2  Gibbon,  ch.  xxxvii,  gives  an  excellent  account.  Cf.  Milman,  III,  iv. 
For  an  exhaustive  treatment  of  Monasticism,  Montalembert,  Monks  of  the 
West,  7  vols. 

8  See  Ch.  V,  the  contest  for  this  on  the  part  of  Hildebrand.  He 
probably  had  the  laity  on  his  side.  Clerical  opposition  was  in  some 
localities  overborne  in  Hildebrand's  favor  by  public  opinion.  —  Freitag, 
Bilder  aus  d.  d.  Vergangenheit,  I,  519;  Lea,  Sacerdotal  Celibacy. 
(  4  Creeds  mostly  grew  up  in  the  East;  discipline  and  organization  were 
the  care  of  the  West.  Few  now  have  any  notion  of  the  extent  to  which 
Roman  ecclesiastical  organizationjibides  even  in  the  most  ultra-Protestant 
churches  of  to-day. 

5  Priests  sometimes  called  flamens,  heathen  festivals  turned  into  Chris- 
tian, incense  burned  and  votive  offerings  made  in  churches,  etc.  See 
Fisher,  Discussions  in  Hist,  and  Theol.,  34  sqq.;  Milman,  III,  i.  So  the 
papacy  itself.  '  If  a  man  consider  the  original  of  this  great  ecclesiastical 
dominion,  he  will  easily  perceive  that  the  papacy  is  no  other  than  the  ghost 
of  the  deceased  Roman  Empire,  sitting  crowned  upon  the  grave  thereof.' 
—  Hobbes,  Leviathan,  pt.  iv,  xlvii. 

6  Purely  ecclesiastical  causes,  of  course,  came  before  bishops'  courts 
alone.  Clergymen  took  civil  litigations  to  bishops'  court  as  a  regular  thing 
first  under  Justinian.  In  criminal  cases  clerks  were  held  to  appear  in  the 
civil  court,  until  Valentinian  III,  452,  gave  the  plaintiff  option  between 
civil  and  ecclesiastical.  Justinian  sent  certain  clerical  cases  to  each. 
Heraclius,  623,  closed  civil  courts  to  clergymen  altogether.  Bishops  were 
of  course  responsible  to  emperors,  yet  rarely  was  one  condemned  without 
the  '  guilty '  of  a  council. 


SELECT   BIBLIOGRAPHY   TO    CHAPTER   IV 

Gregory  of  Tours,  Historia  Francorum,  10  Books.  Gibbon,  De- 
cline and  Fall.**  Milman,  Latin  Christianity.**  Hodgkin,  Italy  & 
Her  Invaders,**  2  v.  Sheppard,  Fall  of  Rome  and  Rise  of  New  Nation- 
alities** [much  the  best  single  vol.  on  the  subj.].  Bryce,  Holy  Roman 
Empire,  i,  ii.  Kingsley,  Roman  &  Teuton.  Dahn  [inOncken],  Urgeschich. 
d.  germanischen  u.  romanischen  Volker,  2  v.  Smyth,  Lect.  on  Mod.  H.,  I. 
Guizot,  H.  of  Civilization  in  France,**  I— III;  do.  in  Europe  ;  Essais  sur 
fhisl.  de  France*  [1823].  Duruy,  Moyen  Age*  Liv.  I.  Stille',  Studies 
in  Mediaev.  H.,*  i,  ii.  Ozanam,  H.  of  Civilization  in  Vth  Cent.,*  2  v.  de 
Coulanges,  Institutions  polit.  de  rancienne  France,**  Pt.  I.  Leo,  Gesch. 
d.  Mitlelalters,  I.  Kaufmann,  Deutsche  Gesch.,**  2  v.  Lecky,  European 
Morals,  2  v.  Sartorius,  Italie  sous  les  Goths.  Fauriel,  Hist,  de  la  Gaule 
meridionale.  Montesquieu,  Grandeur  &  Declension  of  Rom.  Emp. 
Late  Rome.  —  Mommsen,  H.  of  Rome,  Bk.  VIII.  Hertzberg  [in 
Oncken],  Gesch.  d.  romischen  Kaiserzeit;*  Gesch.  Griechenlands 
unter  d.  Herrsch.  d.  Rower,*  3  v.;  Gesch.  der  Byzantiner  u.  d. 
osmanischen  Reiches.*  Ranke,  Weltgesch.,*  Th.  IV.  Thierry  [Am.], 
Hist,  romaine  aux  iv  et  v  Siecles;*  Tableau  de  I 'emp.  roin.,  Liv.  vi. 
The  Early  Germans.  —  Tacitus,  Germania.**  Arnold,  Ansiedehtn- 
gen  u.  Wanderungen  deutscher  St'dmme ;  Deutsche  Urzeit;*  Frdnkische 
Zeit,  i,  ii.  Stubbs,  Constl.  H.  of  Eng.,  i-iii  [excellent  brief  account]. 
Nitzsch,  Gesch.  d.  d.  Volkes,*  I.  v.  Sybel,  Entstehung  d.  d.  Kotiigthums* 
Waitz,  D.  Verfassungsgesch,**  I.  Sohm,  Altdeutsche  Reichs-  u.  Gerichlsv'- 
fassung,**  I.  Wietersheim,  Volkerwanderungen,  2  v.  [Dahn's  ed., 
1881,  is  best.  See  at  end  of  vol.  ii  for  an  invaluable  and  nearly  exhaustive 
list  of  the  authorities  for  this  Chapter,  both  original  and  secondary]. 
Lewis,  H.  of  Germany.  Dahn,  K'onige  d.  Germanen  ;  Felicitcis  [the 
latter  a  novel].  Ozanam,  Les  Ger mains  avant  le  Christianisme.* 
v.  Maurer,  Gesch.  d.  Markenverfassung ;  Dorfverfassung  [2  v.]  ;  Staedte- 
verfassung  [4  v.].  Ross,  Early  H.  of  Land-holding  among  the  Germans. 
Giesebrecht,  Gesch.  d.  deutscken  Kaiserzeit,  Bk.  I.  Church,  Beg.  of  Mid. 
Ages  [Ep.  of  H.  Ser.].  'The  Conversion  of  the  West'*  [5  v.,  Soc.  for 
Prom.  Chtn.  Knowl.].  Martin,  H.  de  France,  vols,  i,  ii.  Adams,  Man. 
of  Histl.  Lit.,  276-'93  [gives  a  valuable  list  of  works  on  early  German 
institutions]. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE   DISSOLUTION   OF  ROME 


§  i     Signification  and  Significance 

Freeman,  Goths  at  Ravenna  [Hist'l  Essays,  iii  ser.] .    Gibbon,  xxx-xxxviii.    Sheppard,  i. 

The  study  of  the  decline  and  dismemberment  of  the 
Roman  state  is  second  to  none  in  all  history  for  either 
importance  or  interest.  To  an  understanding  of  the 
mediaeval  or  of  the  modern  world  it  is  indispensable. 
The  external  revolutions  of  the  fifth  century  are  a  suf- 
ficient sign  of  altered  times.  At  Theodosius's  death 
(395)  the  empire  presents  nearly  the  same  aspect  as 
ever  since  Diocletian,  yet  before  500  the  city  is  twice 
sacked,1  and  Western  Rome,  saved  from  Attila  near 
Troyes2  (451)  only  by  a  spasmodic  effort  lapses  in  476. 
The  Visigothic  empire  of  South  Gaul 3  and  Spain  dates 
from  41 5  (-711),  that  of  the  Vandals  in  Africa  from  429 
(-534),  the  English  in  Britain  from  449,  the  Frankish 
under  Chlodovech  4  from  486,  the  Ostrogothic  5  in  Italy 
from  493 (-5 5 5).  Henceforth,  apart  from  the  momentary 
splendor  of  Justinian's  reign,  527-65,  old,  great,  his- 
toric Rome  is  no  more.  It  is  misleading  to  name  this 
change  a  '  fall.' 6  Immense  and  momentous,  it  involved 
no  sudden  collapse  even  of  government,  the  deposition 
of  Romulus  Augustulus  being  no  crisis.     It  was  rather 


IOO  THE   DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

a  transformation,  a  re-grouping  of  parts  and  forces.  In 
a  sense  Rome  exists  to-day7:  its  language,  law,  munici- 
pal system,  imperial  idea  in  both  church  and  state,  as 
well  as  a  mighty  mass  of  unspecifiable  influences  in 
popular  thought  and  life.  The  later  Eastern  and  a  later 
Western  Rome  each  claimed,  not  without  ground,  to  be 
the  continued  self  of  the  old.  And  in  such  dissolution 
as  did  occur,  energy  was  largely  conserved,  and  elements 
passed  to  their  new  settings  one  by  one.  Rome  broke 
up  partly  from  internal  causes,8  partly  from  external. 
Attend  first  to  the  former. 

1  By  Alaric,  410,  by  Genseric,  455.  Radagaisus,  only  that  he  was 
beaten  by  Stilicho  at  Faesulae,  would  have  plundered  the  city  in  406.  It 
is  to  aid  Stilicho  against  Alaric  in  410  that  Honorius  recalls  the  last  Roman 
soldiers  from  Britain. 

2  On  Attila  and  the  Huns,  Montesquieu,  ch.  xix,  and  Thierry  in  Rev. 
d.  d.  Mondes,  1852,  1855.  The  location  of  the  great  battle  is  best  discussed 
by  Wietersheim  in  an  excursus  to  ch.  xv  in  vol.  ii  of  his  Volkenuandcr- 
ungen.  He  places  it  near  Mery  sur  Seine,  on  the  right  bank,  not  far  from 
Troyes  but  a  good  way  from  CMlons,  where  Gibbon  and  all  older  writers 
locate  it. 

8  For  long  the  Visigoths  held  far  more  than  half  of  Gaul,  i.e.,  to  the 
Loire,  and  their  capital  was  Toulouse  [  Tolosd].  Their  frontier  drew  south- 
ward with  Frankish  advance  [§  17],  and  from  507  they  were  a  merely 
Spanish  power. 

4  I.e.,  Clovis,  spelled  as  by  Gregory  of  Tours,  omitting  the  Latin  termi- 
nation. 

8  To  complete  the  list  of  barbarian  kingdoms  on  the  soil  of  Rome  add 
the  Suevic  in  northwestern  Spain  from  about  409  till  absorbed  by  the  Visi- 
gothic,  the  Burgundian  in  the  valley  of  the  middle  Rhone,  from  about 
413  till  incorporated  by  the  sons  of  Chlodovech  [§  17],  534,  and  the  Lom- 
bard, which  supplanted  the  eastern  empire  in  northern  Italy  in  568,  but 
15  years  after  Justinian's  conq.,  and  existed  under  its  own  and  the  Frankish 
kings  till  774. 

6  So  Freeman,  Contemp.  Rev.,  May,  1884,  668-678,  also  Oxford  Inaug., 
'  the  great  central  fact  of  European  history,  the  growth  and  the  abiding 
power  of  Rome.' 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  IOI 

7  See  Bryce,  Holy  Roman  Empire,  370,  and  Sheppard,  i- 

8  On  these,  cf.  Gibbon,  xxxviii  [end],  lxxi;  Montesquieu,  Grandeur  and 
Declension,  ch.  ix  sqq. ;  Lecky,  Eur.  Mor.,  I.  Merivale,  ch.  lxviii;  Blan- 
qui,  Hist,  of  Pol.  Economy,  ch.  vi-viii.  It  has  been  well  remarked  that  in 
the  fate  of  Rome  if  anywhere  history  has  to  be  accounted  for  by  Kultur- 
history. 

§  2     Moral  Decadence 

Gibbon,  chaps,  ii,  vii.    Merivale,  xxii.    Mommsen,V ,  xi.    Friedl'dnder,  Sittengesch. 
Roms,  Th.  III.    Montesquieu,  ch.  x. 

The  sturdy  virtue  of  the  early  Romans,  more  theo- 
sophic 2  than  rational  in  its  basis,  early  gave  way  before 
Greek  scepticism,  whose  attack,  coincident  in  time  with 
the  full  manhood  of  the  Roman  people,  wrought  here 
worse  corruption  and  wreck  than  at  home.  Thus  Roman 
toleration  of  religions  sprung  rather  from  indifference 
than  from  conviction.  Debasing  superstitions  accom- 
panied the  relaxation  of  faith,  often  in  the  same  person. 
Astrology,  Bacchanalia  and  devil-worship  engaged  minds 
the  most  cultivated.  These  ill  influences  were  height- 
ened by  acquaintance  with  the  dissolute  East  and  also 
by  wealth.  Riches  were  badly  distributed,  fortunes  and 
waste  inordinate.  AFillionaires  like  Lucullus,  Crassus 
and  Herodes  Atticus  vied  with  one  another  in  useless 
expenditure.2  In  spite  of  passing  improvement  under 
the  early  empire,  such  luxury  continued  to  breed  every 
vice.  Literature  renounced  noble  aims,  and  art,  after  ^ 
Hadrian,  drooped  to  servile  imitation.3  While  cities  and 
villas  were  rich  with  its  best  products  the  real  art  spirit 
was  dead,  supplanted  by  oriental  relish  for  the  colossal. 
Greek  artists  themselves  had  now  ceased  to  create. 
Zest  for  life  was  rare,4  misanthropy,  gloom,  despair 
prevalent.      Depravity   so   widespread   and   deep   even 


102  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

Christianity  was  unable  to  counteract  otherwise  than 
very  gradually.  The  moral  regeneration  necessary  to 
the  salvation  of  the  state  could  not  be  effected  in  season. 

1  Related  rather  to  the  Etruscan  than  to  the  Greek. 

2  Lucullus  is  said  to  have  paid  50,000  denarii,  above  $8,000,  for  a  single 
supper.  Pompey  was  worth  3^  million  dollars,  Aesopus  the  actor  I  mil- 
lion, Crassus  at  first  350  thousand,  at  the  end  of  his  career,  after  unheard- 
of  largesses  to  the  people,  8^  million.  Were  purchasing  power  regarded, 
these  sums  would  have  to  be  much  enlarged,  perhaps  doubled.  We  read 
that  $750,000  were  once  paid  for  a  city  house,  $200,000  for  a  country  villa, 
$1200  often  for  a   horse,  $50,000  once  for  a  table  of  an  African  wood. 

A  Pliny  declares  that  articles  from  India  often  appreciated  100  fold  in  coming 
to  Rome.  Table  luxury  was  worst.  Guests  often  took  emetics  after  feast- 
ing. —  Mommsen.  See  ibid.,  vol.  iv,  614  sq.,  for  the  menu  of  such  a  feast, 
and  for  the  debts  of  certain  great  Romans.  Atticus,  as  became  a  preceptor 
of  Aurelius,  confessedly  spent  money  more  rationally,  viz.,  in  embellishing 
Athens,  yet  industrial  investment  was  then  more  needed  than  gorgeous 
theatres.  For  the  terribly  interesting  picture  which  Ammianus  draws  of 
the  Romans  at  the  time  of  the  Gothic  invasion,  see  Gibbon,  vol.  iii,  252 
sqq.  [ed.  Milm.].  The  Romans  ate  little  beef,  much  pork.  Flamininus, 
in  Plutarch's  life  of  him,  relates  that  dining  once  with  a  friend,  he  de- 
murred at  the  large  number  of  courses.  '  Be  easy,'  was  the  reply,  '  it's  all 
hog's  flesh,  differing  only  in  cooking  and  sauce.' 

3  On  art  at  Rome  see  Ch.  Ill,  §  5,  and  notes;  also  Friedlander,  III,  ii. 

4  Too  many  of  Seneca's  fine  precepts  are  to  direct  how  life  may  be  en- 
dured rather  than  how  it  may  be  used.  Strange  that  he  should  ever  have 
been  thought  to  have  learned  of  Paul. 


§  3     The  Influence  of  the  Church 

Thierry,  Tableau,  Liv.  V.    von  Sybel,  Kleine  hist.  Schriften  I,  27  sqq. 

While  doing  so  much  to  render  Rome  eternal  in  one 
way,1  the  church,  herein  comparing  unfavorably  with 
Stoicism,2  not  only  failed  to  enforce  or  to  cultivate  the 
civic  virtues  but  even  antagonized  these,  becoming  a 
most  energetic  solvent  of  political  society.      Christians 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  103 

believed  the  end  of  this  world  imminent,  preparation 
for  the  next,  man's  sole  legitimate  business.3  This 
engrossing  thought  regulated  all  their  views  of  duty. 
Retirement  from  active  life  was  honored  and  rewarded. 
Tertullian  boasted  that  'nothing  was  so  foreign  to 
Christians  as  public  affgirs.'  Till  Constantine,  the  em- 
pire was  usually  identified  with  Antichrist,  speedily  to 
be  consumed  in  the  final  fire.4  Theological  strifes  tended 
to  the  same  result.  That  over  Arianism  shook  the  world. 
The  Donatists  aided  the  Vandals.  Catholic,  especially 
clerical,  influence,  opposing  Arian  kingdoms  indeed, 
yet  decisively  supported  the  invading  Franks  and  Bur- 
gundians,  so  soon  as  orthodox.  The  East,  home  of  meta- 
physical refinements,  where  theology  became  matter  of 
discussion  for  the  populace  as  for  the  learned,  suffered 
total  political  paralysis  through  the  mutual  hatred  of 
sects.5 

1  It  '  maintained  and  propagated  afresh  the  feeling  of  a  single  Roman 
people  throughout  the  world.'  —  Bryce.  Cf.  Fisher,  Discussions,  45  sqq. 
Guizot  is  not  rash  in  holding  that  it  was  alone  the  church  with  its  organi- 
zation so  solid  and  central  that  saved  Christianity  in  the  invasion-period, 
and  Christianity  was  through  many  ages,  at  least  in  the  West,  Rome's 
affair.  Church  and  clergy  did  much  also  to  conserve  Roman  law.  Sa- 
vigny's  great  work  has  a  ch.  on  this.  Venerandae  romanae  leges,  wrote  a 
9th  century  pope  to  the  Franks,  divinitus per  ora  principum  promulgalae. 

2  Roman  Stoics  exalted  service  to  the  state  as  especially  meritorious. 
Witness  Aurelius,  who  with  fatal  self-forgetfulness  '  readily  exposed  his 
person  to  eight  winter  campaigns  on  the  frozen  banks  of  the  Danube.'  — 
Gibbon. 

3  Even  Augustine,  in  his  Civitas  dei  declares  that  nothing  on  earth  is  of 
value  save  faith.  Men  have  but  one  task,  care  for  a  future  life.  Safety  in 
this  regard  is  secured  solely  through  the  church.  All  human  efforts  are  to 
be  for  the  church.  The  state  exists  for  her.  So  does  the  emperor.  If  he 
refuses  her  service  he  is  but  a  robber-king,  a  servant  of  the  devil. 

4  Christians  took  account  of  Paul's  words:   'The  poM'ers  that  be  are 


-* 


104  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

ordained  of  God,'  but  supposed  them  ordained  for  sinners  only,  hence 
destined  to  be  done  away  by  the  progress  of  Christianity.  '  We  look  up 
to  the  emperor,'  argues  Tertullian,  '  as  one  whom  our  God  has  elected. 
Gesar  is  ours  all  the  more  as  being  appointed  [constitutes]  by  our  God.' 
—  Apology,  34.  But  the  state  might  be  from  God  yet  carried  on  by 
Satan.  Christians,  continues  Tertullian's  Apology,  678,  must  needs  pray 
for  the  state  because  although  the  end  of  the  world  is  approaching  it  is 
retarded  by  the  presence  of  the  empire. 

6  E.g.,  in  the  iconoclastic  strife.  See  Gibbon,  xlix.  It  was  much  the 
same  in  all  the  controversies  named  in  §  19.  For  the  fight  over  Ari- 
anism,  Gibbon,  xxi;   for  that  against  the  Paulicians,  ibid.,  liv. 


§  4    Death  of  the  Military  Spirit 

Gibbon,  chaps,  i,  ii,  vii,  xvii,    Mom  insert,  V,  xi.    Montesquieu,  chaps,  ix,  xvi. 

Rome's  early  victories  were  gotten  by  citizen-soldiers, 
receiving  small 1  pay  or  none,  moved  alone  by  zealous 
devotion  to  the  state.  Later,  increased  power  relieved 
the  citizens  from  the  necessity  of  campaigning,  while 
wealth  enabled  them  to  enlist  provincials  and  foreigners. 
The  service  became  splendid  but  mercenary,  the  soldiery 
a  virtual  caste,  Roman  only  in  name,  fighting  not  for  a 

<  cause  but  for  a  commander,  their  motive  no  longer 
patriotism  but  pay.  To  say  nothing  of  innumerable 
laeti  and  auxiliaries,2  the  regular  soldiers  of  the  later 
empire,  praetorians,3  generals  and  all,  were  of  barbarian 
stock,  many  of  them  born  beyond  the  Roman  pale. 
Even  slaves  were  mustered  in.  No  bond  remained  be- 
tween soldier  and  burgher;  the  less,  as,  to  prevent 
revolts,  hjojcgheLS,  were  .forbidden ..toJueep.  amis.  Slowly 
but  inevitably  resulted  :  i  Indisposition  to  military  duty 
on  the  part  of  citizens  when  again  wanted.  Conscrip- 
tion even  availed  little,  being  eluded  by  flight  or  self- 
mutilation.     2  Unfitness  therefor  of  such  as  did  enter 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  105 

the  army.  3  Total  helplessness  against  invaders,  the 
Roman  armies  being  beaten.  4  Danger  to  the  state, 
especially  from  praetorians,  after  the  decline  of  disci- 
pline which  inevitably  followed  the  soldiers'  discovery  of 
their  importance.  5  Gift  of  military  education  to  hosts 
of  officers  and  soldiers  who  used  it  against  Rome.4  6 
Poverty  through  wages  and  bounties  to  soldiers  and 
payments  to  threatening  nations  as  price  of  peace. 


1  In  early  Rome  military  service  was  an  honor,  almost  a  mark  of  aris 
tocracy.  It  was  an  epoch  when,  soon  after  v.c.  300,  B.C.  454,  Rome  began 
to  pay  her  soldiers  regular  wages.  So  late  as  the  Punic  wars  the  soldiers 
were  burgesses  and  yeomen.  T.  Quintius  Flamininus,  consul  v.c.  556, 
B.C.  198,  was  the  first  Roman  general  to  enrol  proletarians  in  the  legions.  \f 
It  was  still  mainly  a  burgess-army  till  its  reorganization  under  Marius. 
On  this  see  Mommsen,  IV,  vi.  After  Marius,  enlistment,  not  levy,  was  the 
great  means  of  recruiting,  yet  to  the  very  latest  times  the  Roman  army  was 
formidable,  a  miracle  of  fighting  energy.  Under  Constantine's  successors  >jf 
the  regular  army  commonly  numbered  about  645,000. 

2  The  laeti  were  the  soldier-colonists  along  the  German  border.  They 
made  themselves  villages  for  camps,  and  did  no  fighting  save  as  invasion 
was  attempted.  The  arrangement  was  begun  by  Alexander  Severus,  222— 
'35,  that  '  young  philosopher  who  brought  back  for  an  instant  the  beautiful 
days  of  the  Antonines,  and  in  whose  reign  the  old  civilization  shot  up  its 
last  beam  of  glory.'  —  Secretan,  fhdalite,  18.  Lands  were  given  to  the 
laeti  first  by  Probus,  276-'82,  who  thus  colonized  some  thousands  of  Franks 
on  the  Rhine,  where  population  had  grown  thin  through  barbarian  attacks. 
The  auxiliaries  or  foederati  were  non-Roman  armies  with  their  own  com- 
manders, accoutrements  and  discipline,  in  the  service  of  Rome.  The  Visi- 
goths under  Alaric  bore  for  a  time  this  relation.  In  the  legions  officers 
were  old-Romans  far  longer  than  the  rank  and  file. 

3  The  famous  jurisconsult  Ulpian  lost  his  life,  A.D.  228,  in  trying  to 
quell  a  rising  of  the  praetorians  commanded  by  him  as  praefectus  praetorio. 
The  number  of  these  famous  guards  was  much  reduced  by  Diocletian  and 
all  were  done  away  by  Constantine.  Constantine  also  multiplied  the  num- 
ber and  reduced  the  strength  of  the  legions.  On  these  and  the  other 
military  and  the  civil  changes  of  this  emperor,  Gibbon,  xvii.  In  the  East, 
Justinian  again  united  the  two  species  of  power. 


S 


A 


I06  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

4  Not  in  the  civil  wars  alone.  Maroboduus  and  Arminius  had  both 
been  educated  among  the  Romans.  Of  course  the  mere  fact  that  under  the 
empire  we  find  so  many  non-Italians  in  Rome's  service  is  not  of  itself  any 
proof  of  Rome's  decay.  After  Caracalla,  212,  if  they  were  subjects  they 
were  Romans,  wherever  born.  Yet  Syrian,  Egyptian  or  Dacian  soldiers 
would  certainly  be  far  less  likely  to  have  or  to  retain  Roman  patriotism 
than  those  born  in  Italy. 

§  5     Poverty 


Mommsen,  IV,  x.  Guizot,  Civilization  in  France,  Lect.  ii,  vii.  Duruy,  Moyen  Age, 
I,  i.  Blanqui,  Hist,  of  Pol.  Economy,  vi-x.  Dureau  de  la  Malle ,  Econ.  politique 
des  rontains,  2  v.     Savigny,  Romisches  Recht  im  Mittelalter,  I,  ch.  ii. 

This  had  other  and  larger  sources  :  1  Slave 1  labor, 
making  free  disgraceful.     2  Donations  to  the  populace 

-■V  for  bread  and  shows.  3  Expense  of  the  gorgeous  impe- 
rial court,  doubled  after  Theodosius.2  4  Gifts  to  the 
church  by  emperors  and  by  private  persons.  5  With- 
drawal of  soldiers  and  monks  from  the  producing  class. 
6  The  burdens  and  bad  incidence  of  taxes,  especially 
from  the  time  of  Constantine.3     It  was  in  fiscal  matters 

^*A  Ithat  Roman  administration  was  least  wise :  it*liot  only 
taxed  needlessly,  for  favorites,  actors,  gladiators,  lar- 
gesses and  the  like,  but  at  the  same  time  discouraged 
/\  production  or  closed   its   avenues.      Select  classes   of 

f  persons  were  exempted  from  public  dues,  customs  were 
.  oppressive  and  irregular,  the  taxed  were  crushed  utterly. 
,The  result,  a  fatal  one,  was  the  erasure  of  all  middle 
class  from  the  population.4  Each  body  of  curials  was 
held  responsible  for  the  revenues  from  its  district.  A 
curial  could  alienate  only  by  permission,  lost  one-fourth 
by  marrying  a  non-curial,  if  heirless  could  bequeath  but 
a  fourth.  Curials  in  numbers  sought  the  army  and  the 
priesthood,  but  fresh  laws  were  passed  to  chain  them. 
Many  turned  coloni ;   some,  robbers.     Wealth  became 


THE   DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  107 

massed  in  few  hands.  The  great  enjoyed  their  carriages 
of  solid  silver,  golden  villas  and  palaces  and  leagues  of 
beautiful  parks.  Farms  often  covered  five  hundred 
square  miles,  being  tilled  on  shares  by  coloni,  a  class 
constantly  recruited  from  the  poor  free,  who  rushed 
countryward  on  the  failure  of  bread-donations  in  town. 
Yet  scarcely  a  quarter^ of  former  crops  was  obtained. 
Through  many  tracts  that  had  earlier  been  as  gardens, 
one  could  travel  for  days  without  seeing  a  human  dwell-  v' 
ing.  A  third  of  Africa  and  two-thirds  of  rich  Campania 
were  without  an  inhabitant.  Wide  reaches  of  Umbria 
and  Etruria  were  grown  up  with  briers  and  pastured  by 
swine.5 

1  On  Roman  slavery  see  Gibbon,  ch.  ii,  with  Guizot's  and  Milman's 
notes,  also  in  Lea's  Studies,  and  Mommsen  as  at  next  §.  Secretan  thinks 
this  about  the  sole  cause  of  Rome's  ruin  — feodalite,  37  sqq.,  a  fine  discus- 
sion. 

2  Who  restored  to  the  West  [but  not  to  the  city  of  Rome]  the  honor  of 
imperial  residence.  Honorius,  his  younger  son,  was  to  have  his  seat  at 
Milan,  Arcadius,  the  elder,  his  at  Constantinople.  —  Gibbon,  xxix.  Upon 
the  approach  of  Radagaisus,  Honorius  removes  to  Ravenna,  which  hence- 
forward remains  the  imperial  centre  for  the  West. 

8  Political  disorder  might  be  mentioned  as  a  seventh  source,  but  it  be- 
came prominent  too  late  to  be  of  great  consequence.  During  all  the  proud 
time  of  the  empire  property  was  as  safe  and  justice  between  man  and  man 
as  swift  and  sure  as  they  have  been  in  any  period  of  history. 

4  On  the  wretchedness  of  the  later  curials,  Savigny,  Guizot  and  Duruy 
as  above.  Savigny  prefers  the  word  '  decurion  '  [decurio — perhaps  from 
decern  and  so  =  tithing-man  or  tunginus,  or  better,  from  de  and  curia, 
'one  of  the  curia'].  Duruy,  p.  22,  briefly  states  the  main  features  of  the 
imperial  tax  system.  The  principal  tax  was  upon  land,  the  '  indiction '  v  a 
whose  rate  Constantine,  or,  according  to  Mommsen,  Hadrian,  fixed  as  once  >^ 
in  15  years  [cycle  of  indictions].  Earlier  the  period  had  been  5,  and  in 
Egypt  I.  Even  now  there  were  frequent  and  unheralded  ■  superindictions.' 
—  Mommsen  [in  Rom.  Alterthiimer,  V],  Staatsrccht,  II,  945,  where  he 
suggests  the  Egyptian  origin  of  the  15-year  period.     Elagabalus  enforced 


ud    J 


s\ 


108  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

taxes  in  gold,  his  government  paying  its  dues  in  debased  silver  at  nominal 
value,  which  recipients  had  to  use  at  its  real  value  in  purchasing  their  gold. 
Customs-duties  were  not  protective  in  nature  but  numerous  and  high.  The 
same  article  would  often  be  tolled  a  dozen  times.  This  grinding  to  death 
of  the  middle  class  harmed  the  empire  more  than  all  the  ravages  of  the 
barbarians. 

6  See  Essay  i  in  v.  Sybel's  Kleint  hist.  Schriften,  I. 


§  6    Occult  Influences 

Mommsen,  III,  xii;  V,  xi.  Jacob,  Production  and  Consumption  of  Precious  Metals, 
vii-x.  Gamier,  Histoire  de  la  tnottnaie,  II,  xvi-xx.  Dttreau  de  la  Malle,  as  at 
§  5.     Blanqui,  as  at  §  5,  vii,  viii,  xxiv. 

Certain  ultimate  causes  of  Rome's  decay  lay  very 
deep.  Not  indolence  nor  alone  gratuities  of  corn  or 
anyiorm  of  maladministration  begot  the  widespread 
wretchedness  above  described.  Rome's  peculiar  history 
had  kept  from  her  the  secret  of  wealth-production,  and 
so  soon  as  no  rich  lands  remained  to  conquer,  her  re- 
sources began  hopelessly  to  shrink.1  In  Italy  and  the 
regions  about  Constantinople  long  importation  of  food, 
partly  enforced  and  partly  natural,  had  induced  desue- 
tude of  agriculture.  Land  was  cheapened  and  thus 
massed  in  latifundia,  the  absolute  form  of  tenure  which 
centuries  of  Roman  land-law  development  had  produced, 
placing  it,  when  donations  failed  and  it  was  again  valu- 
able for  cultivation,  beyond  reach  of  the  poor.  The 
bane  was  aggravated  by  the  lex  Claudia,  forbidding  sena- 
torial  houses  to  engage  in  commerce. ,  They  invested  in 
land,  worked  by  slaves  on  a  large  scale.  The  peasants 
were  reduced  to  coloni,  serfs,  only  better  than  slaves.2 
Still  deadlier  to  industry  was  the  slow  rarefaction  of 
money  and  the  consequent  fall  of  prices  that  set  in 
early  in  the  history  of  the  empire.      The  product  of 


THE   DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  IO9 

the  mines  fell  off,  ceasing  by  476,  and  the  influx  of  pre- 
cious metal  from  remote  parts  ended  along  with  con- 
quest, the  stock  in  the  form  of  wares  and  trinkets  being 
at  the  same  time  too  small  to  spare  much  for  coinage. 

A  vast  amount  of  coin  was  exported  in  return  for  luxi<    ^ 
ries.      Paper   money   was    unknown.      The  purchasing  ^ 
power  of  gold  and  silver  rose,  that  of  other  things  fell. 
Instead  of  being  productively  used,  money  was  hoarded.3 
Both  this  and  the  massing  of  land  became  worse  evils, 
of  course,  with  increase  of  political  disorder. 

1  '  You  would  be  rich,'  said  Julian  to  his  mutinous  army,  '  then  let  us 
march  upon  Persia.  For  the  riches  of  Rome  are  no  more,  her  cities  in 
ruins,  provinces  desolate,  treasury  exhausted,  —  all  owin^to  those  who  per- 
suaded our  princes  to  purchase  peace  from  the  barbarians' 

2  Pliny  said,  la tif undid  perdidere  Italiam.  They  caused  poverty  not 
only  directly,  but  also  through  great  reduction  of  population,  since  with 
the  advance  of  slavery  the  family  relation  was  ignored.  The  lex  Claudia 
passed  just  before  v.c.  536,  B.C.,  218.  The  ancient  world  had  no  manu- 
factories of  the  modern  kind,  only  immense  private  shops  with  slave-arti- 
sans. Nor  any  great  industrial  cities  like  Lowell  or  Fall  River,  or  any 
commercial  like  Liverpool,  Hamburg  or  New  York.  Vespasian  and  Titus 
ended  use  by  the  poor  of  the  common  lands.  Being  unable  to  live  wholly 
from  their  small  farms,  they  incurred  mortgage  debts  on  these,  which  fewer 
and  fewer  could  pay.  Thus  not  only  did  petty  estates  pass  into  latifundia 
but  the  old  owners  had  no  resource  but  to  work  these  for  the  purchasers, 
for  \  or  \  the  crop.  Such  coloni  at  first  commonly  rented  for  5  years,  but 
the  same  causes  that  had  made  them  tenants  inclined  them  to  wish  leases 
to  be  as  long  as  they  could  secure.  Leases  came  to  be  made  for  100  years 
and  hereditary.  Some  were  perpetual.  Thus  men  who  had  been  free 
became  chained  to  the  soil,  so  that  at  last  only  marriage  outwardly  marked 
a  colonus  from  a  sla/e.  Really  there  was  always  this  other  difference  that 
the  serf  could  not  legally  be  torn  from  his  land  or  forced  to  pay  more  than 
the  stipulated  share  for  its  usufruct.  This  description  applies  best  to  Italy 
and  Gaul.  —  Leo,  Gesch.  d.  Aftllelalters,  Bd.  i,  22  sqq.;  Guizot,  Civilization 
in  France,  vii;  Thierry,  Third  Estate,  ch.  i. 

8  For  the  industrial  asphyxia  resulting  from  falling  prices,  see  F.  A. 
Walker,  Money. 


; 


1 10  the  dissolution  of  rome 

§  7     Lack  of  Unity 

Guizot,  Essais  sur  fhistoire  de  France,  i. 

Rome  could  incorporate  nations,  but  '  in  the  absence  of 
those  vast  and  frequent  relations  which  give  men  com- 
munity of  ideas  and  reciprocity  of  interests,' 1  could  not 
assimilate  or  unify  them,  so  many  and  distant  were  they 
and  so  poor  the  then  means  of  communication.  In  spite 
of  best  endeavors  to  this  end,  the  empire  never  became 
a  living  organism.  Rather  was  it  to  the  last  an  agglom- 
eration of  peoples  who,  however  much  they  rejoiced  in 
the  Roman  name,  citizenship  and  'peace,'  had  no  concert 
of  political  feeling  or  action.  No  one  man  could  in 
troubled  times,  or  properly  in  tranquil,  direct  imperial 
affairs.  Society  lacked  chemical  not  less  than  mechan- 
ical homogeneity.  Dire  evils  in  this  regard  were  :  I  The 
prevalence  of  guilds.2  2  Dichotomy  of  society  into  aris- 
tocracy and  actual  or  virtual  slaves,3  antipodal  ranks,  in 
deadly  mutual  hostility,  both  totally  destitute  of  patriot- 
ism. 3  The  most  fatal  internal  cause  of  Rome's  disin- 
tegration :  separation  between  municipal  and  general- 
political  interests  and  rights.  Officers  of  government, 
a  close  corporation,  cared  only  for  the  general ;  all  other 
citizens,  the  great  mass,  only  for  the  local,  the  municipal, 
a  condition  of  things  proved  by  history  inconsistent  with 
either  a  free  state  or  a  strong.4 

1  Guizot.  Such  unity,  he  adds,  '  may  be  for  a  time  effected  by  compul. 
sion  or  by  the  ascendancy  of  some  superior  man,  but  such  forces  are  not  per- 
manent. No  state  can  be  permanent  unless  its  roots  and  causes  are  in 
society  itself,  in  the  physical  and  moral  relations  of  the  men  who  compose 
it.'  Hence  broke  up  Karl  the  Great's  empire  and  that  of  his  perhaps  more 
powerful  contemporary,  Haroun  Alraschid.  The  efforts  of  Diocletian  and 
Constantine,  and  again  of  Theodosius,  to  divide  the  imperial  headship 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  III 

between  different  parts  of  the  empire  did  little  good,  perhaps  on  the  whole 
aggravated  the  evil  they  were  meant  to  check.  —  Thierry,  Tableau,  193. 
Practically,  the  Roman  world  was  larger  than  the  entire  globe  to-day. 
Cf.  Curtius's  Rede  [1881],  Reichsbildungen  im  kl.  Altherthum. 

2  On  guilds,  Thierry,  Tableau,  201 ;   Duruy,  Moyen  Age,  23. 

3  Virtual  slaves,  see  last  §,  n.  2;  actual,  §  5,  n.  1.  The  body  of  the 
Roman  people  would  be  now  i)  the  poorest  curials,  ii)  the  coloni  or  serfs, 
and  iii)  the  slaves  proper.  — Duruy,  21  sqq. 

4  Says  Guizot,  further  :  Pour  que  le  droit  existe  surement  quelque  part 
il  faut  qu'il  existe  partout ;  que  sa  presence  au  centre  est  vaine  sHl  n'est 
present  aussi  dans  les  localites  ;  que  sans  les  liberies  politiques  il  n'y  a  \^ 
point  de  liberies  municipals  solides,  el  reciproquement.  —  p.  46  of  the  vol. 
named  above.  Guizot  never  improved  upon  these  old  essays.  His  am- 
pler lectures  merely  popularize  them.  Essay  i  illustrates  the  doctrine  from 
modern  history.  The  third  estate  early  secured  influence  in  the  French 
communes  [see  Ch.  VI] ;  but  having,  in  spite  of  those  centuries  of  effort, 
beginning  with  the  13th,  secured  no  powers  of  a  general  political  nature, 

it  obtained  no  liberty.     Cf.  Maine,  Anc.  Law,  347. 

§  8     The  Primitive  Germans 

Sec  bibliog.  to  this  Chapter,  at  end.    Mommsen,  Bk.  VIII,  iv.    Thierry,  Tableau,V\,  i. 
Sheppard,  iii-viii. 

Yet  Rome  might  have  stoodlong,  perhaps,  by  incor-  \ 

porating  new  elements  of  life,  even  till  now,  but  for  the  , 
inroads  of  the  barbarians.  Between  these  ancrtne  em-  \ 
pire,  the  Rhine,  the  Danube  and  the  Roman  wall  had  till 
nearly  a.d.  375  formed  an  efficient  dividing  line.  Three 
great  belts  of  peoples  dwelt  beyond,  (i)  farthest  north 
and  east  certain  non- Aryan1  tribes,  (ii)  nearest  them 
some  Slavic,  (iii)  skirting  the  empire,  leaders  in  attacks, 
the  Germans.2  History  first  hears  of  the  Germans  about 
320  b.c.3  Their  contact  with  Rome  begins  113  B.C.,  the 
date  of  their  victory  over  the  consul  Cn.  Carbo  at  Noreia. 
It  continues  through  the  periods  (1)  of  Roman  superior- 
ity, to  the  defeat  of  Varus,4  9  a.d.,  (2)  of  equilibrium,  to 


< 


112  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

the  death  of  Aurelius,  180,  (3)  of  German  superiority,  to 
375,  (4)  of  the  founding  of  German  kingdoms  in  the 
empire,  to  568.  Ever  after  Marius  crushes  the  Cimbri,5 
101  b.c,  are  hordes  of  Germans  on  Roman  soil,  at  length 
forming  an  important  element  in  the  population,  (a)  as 
slaves,  (b)  as  coloni,  (c)  as  legionary  soldiers,  (d)  as  laeti, 
1  (e)  as  auxiliaries,  (f)  as  hostages,  (g)  as  individual  adven- 
'  turers.  Many  of  the  last  obtained  In^h^^omanT  offices., 
civil  and  military.'3  Till  the  fourth  century  Germans 
settled  in  the  empire  as  Romans  ;  thenceforward  most 
retained  a  pronounced  German  feeling.  From  375, 
which  is  therefore  an  epoch,  the  invaders  brought  ideas 
of  German  preponderance  and  conquest.  The  springs 
to  German  emigration  were  mainly  tribal  feuds,  over- 
population combined  with  indolence  and  ignorance  of 
agriculture,  and  pressure  from  non-Germanic  peoples.7 

1  I.e.,  Lapps,  Finns  and  Huns.  See  Freeman,  Hist  1.  Geog.,  i,  §  3. 
Cohausen  has  a  work  entitled  Der  romische  Grenzwall,  full  of  informa- 
tion on  the  northern  line  of  the  empire. 

2  See  map.  Shortly  before  the  great  migration,  the  East  Goths  [Os- 
trogoths] held  southern  Russia,  the  West  Goths  [Visigoths]  eastern 
Hungary  and  Roumania,  the  Vandals  southwestern  Hungary,  the  Sueves 
Moravia,  Bohemia  and  Bavaria,  the  Alamans  Wurtemberg  and  Baden,  the 
Burgundians  from  the  Neckar  to  the  Main,  the  Ripuarian  Franks  both 
banks  of  the  Rhine  about  Cologne,  the  Salian  Franks  the  Rhine-mouths, 
the  Saxons  the  lower  Elbe,  the  Lombards  higher  up  this  river  to  the 
southeast,  the  Thuringians  its  southern  head-waters.  The  Alans,  aside 
from  the  Huns  nearly  the  sole  non-Teutonic  invaders,  came  from  the 
lower  Volga. 

8  From  Pytheas  of  Marseilles,  who  made  a  voyage  of  discovery  north- 
ward along  the  Atlantic  coast.  He  did  not  go  far  inland.  The  name 
'Germani'  appears  first  in  Ca?sar,  who  uses  it  as  a  collective  term.  The 
people  themselves  had  then  no  common  title.  Waitz,  Verfassungsgesc/i., 
bd.  i,  23  sq.,  discusses  the  point  at  length.  He  thinks  '  Germani '  of 
Celtic  origin  and  Tacitus  right  in  his  view  of  it  as  at  first  the  designa- 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  113 

tion  of  a  tribe,  applied  generically  by  Caesar.  '  Deutsch '  or  '  Teutsch ' 
[=' Teuton'?]  was  first  used  about  813,  signifying  'domestic'  as  con- 
trasted with  Latin.  It  meant  primarily  the  language,  and  soon  the 
collective  people,  Saxons,  Suabians,  etc.,  revealing  the  growth  of  German 
national  feeling.  The  term  occurs  first  in  an  Italian  document.  As  to 
the  etymological  meaning  of  '  German '  or  of  '  Deutsch  '  ['  Teuton  ']  only 
guesses  have  been  offered. 

i  Merivale,  xxxviii,  interestingly  recounts  this  sad  story.  So  does 
Kaufmann,  Deutsche  Gesck.,  I,  ii. 

5  Mommsen,  vol.  hi,  217,  also  v.  Sybel,  regards  these  people  as  un- 
doubtedly Germans.  The  battle  of  101,  so  fatal  to  the  Cimbri,  was  at 
Vercelli,  in  No.  Italy.  That  of  102,  at  Aix,  in  France,  was  with  the  Am- 
brones  and  Teutons.  —  Mommsen,  vol.  iii,  232. 

6  Such  as  _Stilicho  and  Arminius,  the  one  a  Vandal,  the  other  chief  of 
the  Cherusci.  Arminius  had  the  Roman  civitas.  Maroboduus  was  a 
Sueve.  He  came  to  Rome  young,  as  a  hostage.  Augustus  liked  him  and 
gave  him  a  liberal  education.  Theodoiic  the  great  Ostrogoth  spent  years 
at  Constantinople  as  a  hostage,  was  then  Zeno's  ally,  i.e.,  commanded  a 
Gothic  army  under  Zeno,  and  at  last,  becoming  formidable,  was  sent  to 
make  Italy  his  kingdom,  snatching  it  from  Odoacer.  Ricimer,  the  distin- 
guished lieutenant  of  Aetius  under  Valentinian  III  [424-450],  was  a 
Sueve. 

7  Thus  the  cause  for  the  decisive  incursion  of  the  Goths,  375,  though 
Ranke  inclines  to  question  this,  was  an  overwhelming  onset  by  Huns.  V 
The  descent  of  Sueves,  Alans  and  Vandals  upon  Gaul  and  Spain,  406-407,  j? 
was  also  to  escape  Huns.    Mere  love  of  adventure  or  of  plunder  probably 
had  less  to  do  with  these  movements  than  has  been  supposed. 


§  9    Their  Culture 

Gibbon,  chaps,  ix,  x.  Guizot,  Civilization  in  France,  Lect.  v,  vii.  Green,  H.  of  Eng. 
People,  chaps,  i,  ii.  Tacitus,  Germania.  Arnold,  Urzeit,  Nitzsch,  I,  i,  ii. 
Maine,  Village  Communities  [see  lit.  at  p.  398].    von  Sybel  in  Kl.  hist.  Schriften,  I. 

As  pictured  by  Tacitus  the  Germans  were  taking  the 
first  steps  in  civilization.  Their  susceptibility  therefor 
was  great,  progress  rapid.  At  the  time  of  the  migration 
the  Goths  especially  had  considerable  culture  though  as 
yet  no  writing.1     Significant  that  among  the  northern 


114  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

nations  Germans  alone  founded  kingdoms  in  the  empire. 
German  social,  judicial,  economic,  and  administrative 
arrangements  are  each  noteworthy,2  also  their  personal 
bravery  and  dislike  of  city  life.  The  German  trait  most 
weighty  for  history  as  well  as  most  anti-Roman  was 
individualism,  seen  :  I  In  private  relations.  If  females 
and  slaves  were  chattels,  the  free  man  was,  in  his  per- 
son and  his  domicile,  almost  above  law.  Yet  family  and 
clan  were  important.  2  Politically.  There  was  never 
a  pan-Germanic  nation  or  even  federation,  and  loyalty  to 
government  was  scarcely  conceived.  Nations  divided, 
clans  and  individuals  seceded,  on  the  slightest  provoca- 
tion. Nothing  was  commoner  than  joining  a  foe  to  fight 
one's  own  nation  and  kin.3 

1  There  was  no  German  alphabet  till  the  Moesogothic  of  Ulfilas,  who 
died  388.  It  bore  this  name  because  first  used  by  the  Goths  in  Moesia, 
whither  no  Goths  came  till  about  250.  The  runes  were  not  letters,  though 
perhaps  utilized  by  Ulfilas  in  forming  his  alphabet. 

2  We  can  only  touch  this  entertaining  theme,  referring  for  ampler  treat- 
ment to  the  works  named  above  and  at  end  of  bibliog.  to  this  Ch.,  esp.  to 
Waitz,  Sohm,  Arnold  and  Kaufmann.  Best  brief  account,  wholly  trust- 
worthy, is  in  chaps,  ii  and  iii  of  Stubbs's  Const.  Hist,  of  England.  The 
social  classes  were  nobles,  free,  freedmen,  serfs  and  slaves.  Nobles 
received  respect  but  had  no  extra  political  rights.  Women  were  greatly 
honored  but  without  rights.  Slaves  were  prisoners  of  war,  criminals  or 
self-sold  through  gambling.  They  had  no  rights  but  were  well  treated. 
All  the  free  participated  in  the  land,  in  war,  and  in  the  conduct  of  political 
affairs.  The  general  assembly  of  the  free,  in  every  tribe,  each  new  and  full 
moon,  decided  all  things,  being  legislature,  court,  and  executive.  Special 
leaders,  Herzoge,  not  necessarily  nobles,  were  selected  for  war,  and  prin- 
cipes  to  preside  in  the  assembly  and  to  execute  its  behests.  A  murderer 
could  compound  with  the  dead  man's  family  by  paying  Wehrgeld.  If  he 
did  not  do  this,  personal  vengeance,  Blittrache,  against  him  was  not  only 
legal  but  a  duty  resting  on  the  family  [Fehderecht].  Obdurate  peace- 
breakers  were  outlawed,  declared  vogelfrei.  As  among  primitive  Indo- 
Europeans  everywhere,  land  was  held   in  common   [the   Mark-System], 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  115 

house-lots  and  gardens  alone  excepted,  and  in  Csesar's  time  the  cultivating 
communities  of  each  tribe  were  made  to  interchange  localities  yearly.  The 
practice  had  ceased  when  Tacitus  wrote,  but  the  arable  lots  of  each  Mark- 
community  still  changed  occupants  yearly  in  rotation.  These  Mark-groups 
seem  to  have  been  the  fragments  into  which  broke  up  those  clans  which  all 
over  the  Indo-European  world  succeeded  primeval  patriarchalism.  A 
French  law  of  574  first  made  children  instead  of  clansmen  heirs  to  one 
deceased.  Stubbs,  ch.  iii,  is  the  best  brief  account  of  the  Mark-system. 
For  a  fuller,  Schaeffie,  Ban  u.  Leben  </.  sociah-n  Korpos,  iii,  410  tqq,  To 
the  stone  and  brass  implements  of  an  earlier  day  iron  had  been  added  by 
the  time  of  the  migrations.  No  metal  money  till  contact  with  Romans. 
Cattle  and  grain  raising  were  the  chief  pursuits,  the  work  being  done  by 
women  and  unfree  men.  There  were  no  cities  and  -in  Gesar's  time  no 
fixed  villages.  Their  grains  were  oats,  barley  and  wheat,  besides  which 
they  raised  vegetables  and  flax.  They  had  horses,  cattle,  sheep,  swine  and 
geese,  but  took  no  pains  in  breeding  these  as  they  did  to  improve  their 
dogs  and  hawks  for  hunting.  Stags  were  sometimes  tamed  for  the  chase, 
sometimes  harnessed  to  wagons.  Ross,  Early  H.  of  Land-holding  among 
the  Germans,  learnedly  argues  against  the  above,  that  the  primitive  histori- 
cal Mark-group  consisted  of  slaves,  that  hence  individual,  or  feudal,  pro- 
prietorship in  land  already  subsisted.  The  view  is  ridiculed  by  Maine  and 
has  found  acceptance  nowhere.  H.  B.  Adams  discusses  in  a  brochure  the 
'  Germanic  Origin  of  the  N.  E.  Town.'  The  phrase  misleads.  Our  town 
is  most  significantly  related  to  the  German  village  but  not  in  the  way  of 
historical  continuity.     See  Ch.  II,  §  5,  n.  1. 

3  Hence  nearly  all  the  nations  were  mixtures  of  many  tribes.  Marobod- 
uus  and  Theodoric  both  tried  to  form  a  general  German  confederacy  but 
found  it  impossible. 


e 


§  10    Their  Constitution 

von  Sybel,  Entstchung  d.  d.  Konigthums.       Dahn,  Konige  d.  Germanen.      IVaitz, 
Ver/assungsgesck.,  I.    Fiske,  American  Pol.  Ideas,  ii. 

The  question  has  been  much  discussed  whether  Ger- 
many before  the  invasions  at  all  possessed  proper  politi- 
cal as  distinguished  from  patriarchal  institutions.  Von 
Sybel,  on  the  basis  of  strong  statements  in  Caesar  and 
Tacitus,  earnestly  maintains  the  negative.     They  lived, 


I  l6  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

he  thinks,  in  half-nomadic  clans,  making  their  military 
excursions  under  mere  chiefs  of  bands,  who  only  in 
rarest  cases  deserved  or  received  the  kingly  title,  and 
developing  even  the  beginnings  of  true  states  only  as 
trained  by  the  Romans.  With  this  view  French  writers 
generally  agree.  Most  Germans,  however,  like  Waitz, 
refer  the  German  state,  with  the  veritably  political  ele- 
ments of  king,  army  and  judiciary,  to  purely  German 
times.  The  truth  seems  to  lie  between  the  two  views, 
yet  substantially  more  with  von  Sybel.1  The  clan  and 
its  judge  or  princeps  must  have  had  a  quasi-public 
authority  so  early  as  Caesar,  although  there  were  then 
no  proper  kings  ;  but  Tacitus  speaks  of  German  kings, 
distinct  from  duces2  and  principes,  and  later  such  refer- 
ences are  common.  On  the  other  hand,  considering 
Caesar's  words,  the  proverbially  brittle  character  of  Ger- 
man political  society,  the  weakness  of  kingship  among 
the  Germans  when  it  does  appear,  and  the  existence 
still  of  democratic  tribes,  we  cannot  account  Teutonic 
royalty  at  least,  older  than  our  era. 

1  Caesar,  Gallic  War,  VI,  23,  says  expressly :  In  pace  null  us  est  com- 
munis magistrates,  sed principes  regionum  el pagorum  [i.e.,  of  tribes  and 
of  villages]  inter  suos  ius  dicunt,  controversiasque  minuunt.  He  also 
says:  Quum  bellum  civitas  aut  inlatum  defendit  ant  infert,  magistrates 
qui  eo  bello  praesint,  tit  vitae  necisque  habeant  potestatem,  deliguntur. 
Caesar  got  his  information  from  the  Gauls,  who  would  have  known  of 
German  kings  had  such  existed,  lie  [Gallic  W.,  I,  35]  calls  Ariovistus 
'  rex  '  but  evidently  only  honoris  causa,  as  named  so  by  the  Roman  senate. 
We  cannot  tell  how  far  back  Roman  influence  in  Germany  began.  Ario- 
vistus  at  58  B.C.,  was  well  acquainted  with  affairs  at  Rome  [Gallic  W.,  1, 45] 
and  somehow  received  tidings  thence  scarcely  less  promptly  than  Caesar. 
Such  facility  of  communication  did  not  grow  up  in  a  day.  The  Germans' 
glory  is  not  to  have  had  little  to  learn  from  Rome  but  to  have  learned  so 
much  and  with  such  aptitude.     Fustel  de  Coulanges  [Rev.  d.  d.  Mondes, 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  llj 

15  Mai,  1872]  goes  much  farther  than  v.  Sybel,  considering  the  Germans 
even  at  the  time  of  their  entrance  into  the  empire  little  better  than  savages, 
like  Attila's  bloodthirsty  mob  a  few  years  after,  and  denying  that  they  made 
to  the  civilization  of  Europe  a  single  original  contribution,  political  or 
other.  This  is  the  French  extreme.  Yet  Sir  H.  Maine,  Pop.  Govt.,  3, 
presents  nearly  the  same  view.  a**-^.*,!. 

2  Keges  ex  nobilitate,  duces  ex  virtute  sumunt.  —  Ger mania,  c.  7.  On 
this  passage,  Roth,  Benejicialwesen,  2.  Jordanis  makes  Valentinian  III, 
in  451,  send  to  the  Visigoths  and  to  their  'king.'  Fredegar  speaks  of 
'  king  Chlodovech  and  his  Franks.'  Kingship  did  not  involve  command 
of  the  host,  or  an  especially  efficient  authority,  or  the  non-necessity  of  elec- 
tion. Kings  in  fact  differed  from  principes  in  little  except  that  heredity 
was  observed  in  their  election,  each  being  elected  from  the  same  family  as  . 
his  predecessor,  which  came  to  be  known  with  time  as  the  royal  family, 
elevated  above  other  noble  families. 


§  1 1     Their  Military  System 

Freeman, Growth  of  Eng.  Constitution, 40  sqq.     Stubbs,  ch.  ii.    von  Sybel, Entstekung, 

>i,  §  7- 

With  the  Germans,  army  and  people  were  identical 
conceptions,  every  freeman  being  a  brave.  The  Herzog, 
specially  chosen  for  his  valor,  led  forth  two  kinds  of 
public  forces  proper :  the  elite  infantry,  consisting  of 
the  100  champion  fighters  from  each  pagns,  and  the  gen- 
eral body  of  freemen,  arranged  by  families.  They  fought 
in  wedge  form,  without  reserves,  bearing  shields,  spears, 
bows,  clubs,  hammers  and  battle-axes.  Swords  and  coats 
of  mail  were  late.  But  perhaps  the  chief  source  of  Ger- 
man efficiency  in  war  was  the  comitattts-institutlon,1  a 
system  of  land-privateers  or  bands  of  professional  war- 
riors. Each  man  of  sufficient  means  and  fame  for  valor 
had,  or  might  have,  his  company,  his  family,  of  these 
military  comrade-followers,  free,  sleeping  at  his  hearth 
or  his  camp-fire,  receiving  from  him  living  and  accoutre- 


Il8  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

ments,  and  voluntarily  bound  to  accompany  him  in  war, 
into  the  thickest  of  the  battle,  to  conquer  or  die  with 
him,  but  never  retreat.  The  tie  could  be  dissolved  at 
pleasure,  only  not  in  face  of  the  foe.  The  flower  of  the 
German  youth  were  to  be  found  in  the  comitatus  ;  many 
spent  so  their  entire  lives. 

1  This  is  especially  important  to  an  understanding  of  feudalism.  See 
Ch.  VI,  §  4.  Montesquieu,  Spirit  of  the  Laws,  XXX,  iii,  iv,  sees  in  the 
German  comitatus  and  its  chief,  feudal  vassals  and  their  suzerain  already 
present ;  upon  which  Guizot  neatly  remarks :  il  cut  du  se  borner  a  les 
frevoir  [lie  should,  instead  of  seeing,  merely  have  fore-seen].  The  com- 
iies,  as  members  of  the  comitatus  were  called,  were  usually  mounted,  per- 
haps always,  though  often  dismounting  in  fight.  On  the  death  of  a  comes 
his  military  outfit  returned  to  his  princeps  or  chief,  a  custom  leading  to  the 
'  heriot '  of  English  feudalism.  See  the  author's  Inst,  of  Constitutional 
Hist.  I,  §  3,  4. 

§  12     Their  Religion 

Grimm,  Teutonic  Mythology.  Cox,  Mythology  of  the  Aryan  Nations.  Milman,  III, 
ii.  Freytag,Bilderausd.deutschen  Vergangenheit,\,^.  Merivale,  Continental 
Teutons  [in  Conv'n  of  the  West], 

The  Germans  were  deeply  religious,  yet  for  pagans 
little  superstitious.  Their  priesthood  was  too  weak  to 
tyrannize,  their  investment  of  natural  forces  with  divin- 
ity poetic  rather  than  theological.  The  supreme  Power, 
conceived  by  other  Aryan  heathen  as  light,  sky  or  sun, 
they  worshipped  as  the  Good,  a  moral  being,  '  Gott,' 
'God,'  this  word  existing  without  an  article  in  all  the 
primitive  dialects.  Owing  in  part  to  their  lofty  and 
ethical1  notion  of  the  godhead,  the  Christian  faith 
found  here  readier  acceptance  than  among  any  heathen 
elsewhere.  Other  reasons  concurred.  Worship  was  held 
in  groves  instead  of  temples,  originally  and  to  the  last 
irainly,  without  idols.    No  monumental  art,  as  in  Greece 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  1 19 

and  Rome,  reminded  converts  of  their  ancestral  rites. 
Woden,  Donar  and  Ziu  furnished  a  schema  helpful  to 
faith  in  the  Trinity.2  With  the  ideas  of  retribution, 
vicarious  sacrifice  and  a  future  destruction  of  the  world 
by  fire  the  Germans  had  long  been  familiar.  They  elected 
to  office,  as  the  church  its  bishops,  were  given  to  hos- 
pitality, and  had  a  species  of  eucharistic  observance  for 
keeping  fresh  the  memory  of  the  departed.  Donar  was 
in  some  localities  the  prototype  of  Peter,3  in  others  of 
Judas. 

1  Yet  the  Germans  on  occasion  offered  human  sacrifices,  prisoners  and 
slaves  being  sold  for  this  purpose  so  late  as  the  8th  century.  The  Irminsul 
appears  not  to  have  been  an  idol.  —  Milman,  vol.  ii,  476.  Clotilda  begs 
Chlodovech  to  '  neglect  idols,'  but  may  have  meant  only  an  injunction  to 
renounce  his  heathen  rites. 

2  Besides  names  for  the  days  of  the  week  [exc.  Saturday],  this  northern 
paganism  contributed  to  Christendom  the  Christmas  tree,  successor  to  the 
sacred  Yule  tree  of  our  German  ancestors,  which  the  early  missionaries 
denounced  and  made  every  convert  cut  in  pieces.  Celts,  Romans  and 
Slavs  knew  nothing  of  it.  With  the  Scandinavians  and  probably  the 
Angles  and  Jutes  the  ash,  in  central  Germany  the  pine,  was  the  conse- 
crated tree.     The  Edda  makes  Ygdrasil  or  the  world-tree  an  ash. 

3  Riehl  has  it  that  upon  very  many  old  seats  of  the  Donar-cult,  hills 
always,  churches  of  St.  Peter  were  erected  and  churches  of  St.  Peter  still 
stand. 

§  13     The  Mixture 

Gui'zot,  Civilization  in  France,  esp.  Lect.  v,  vii,  viii.  Stille,  ii,  iii.  Kaufmann, 
Deutsche  Gesch.,  II.  Blanqui,  H.  of  Pol.  Econ.  x.  Milman,  as  at  §  12.  Giete- 
brecht,  bk.  i. 

The  Germans  came  seeking  homes,  hence  though  as 
victors,  not  as  destroyers.  Imperial  domains,  probably 
too  all  unclaimed  lands,  passed  to  the  kings,  to  be  by 
them  utilized  directly  or  let  as  fiefs.  Subjects  were 
provided  for  by  appropriating  private  lands.     This  pro- 


120  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

cess  was  various  in  different  kingdoms.  In  Britain  and 
proconsular  Africa,1  owners  were  totally  dispossessed. 
The  Ostrogoths  took  one-third,  the  Burgundians  first 
one-half,  then  two-thirds,  the  Visigoths  two-thirds,  the 
Franks  none  till  south  of  the  Loire.2  The  Vandals, 
Franks  and  Saxons  made  the  seizure  with  violence  ; 
the  Goths  and  Burgundians  under  forms  of  the  ius 
hospitale?  In  some  districts  the  two  peoples  were 
thoroughly  amalgamated,  in  others,  formed  alternate 
communities,  elsewhere  one  or  the  other  failed.  Urban 
populations  long  remained  almost  solely  Roman.  All 
these  conditions  found  place  in  France  alone.  Local 
government,  diocesan,  provincial  or  municipal,  went  on 
in  many  places  long  after  all  connection  with  the  im- 
perial capital  had  ceased,  ^gidius  and  his  son,  Syag- 
rius,4  kept  Roman  authority  in  exercise  between  the 
Somme  and  the  Loire  till  486.  Establishment  of  bar- 
barian administration  did  not  at  once  displace  Roman, 
but  the  two  prevailed  together.  Confusion  of  national- 
ity was  greatest  in  France,  where  the  old  was  not  pure 
Roman,  the  new  not  pure  German.  While  the  culti- 
vated Gallo-Romans  everywhere  used  Latin,  about  500, 
Saxon  was  to  be  heard  at  Bayeux,  Tartar  in  part  of 
Poitou,  Celtic5  in  Armorica  and  among  the  old  peasantry 
elsewhere,  Alan  at  Orleans,  Frankish  at  Tournai,  Gothic 
at  Tours  and  throughout  the  south.6 

1  I.e.,  the  province  of  Africa,  nearly  coincident  with  the  old  kingdom 
of  Carthage.  The  Vandals  clustered  here,  for  the  purpose  of  mutual 
assistance.     Elsewhere  in  Africa  Romans  kept  much. 

2  Because  public  lands  sufficed.  When  they  crossed  the  Loire  and 
drove  hence  the  Visigoths,  they  appropriated  private  as  well  as  public. 
Chlodovech's  earliest  conquests  seem  not  to  have  been  attended  with  a 
very  great  influx  of  Franks.  —  Roth,  Bcnejicialwesen,  63. 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  121 

8  lus  hospitale  was  a  Roman  administrative  arrangement  for  quartering 
auxiliary  forces  upon  the  people.  Both  the  great  Gothic  nations  entered 
the  empire  as  auxiliaries. 

4  Gregory  of  Tours  speaks  of  Syagrius  as  '  king  of  the  Romans.'  His 
capital  was  Soissons. 

5  The  western  part  of  Armorica  took  the  name  Brittany  from  the  hordes 
of  British  Celts  who  settled  there  during  the  latter  half  of  the  5th  century, 
having  been  driven  from  Britain  by  the  invading  Saxons. 

6  Besides,  the  Franks  themselves  were  a  composite  people,  a  confeder- 
acy of  tribes  that  gradually  blended.  Clovis  at  Tournai  was  only  one  of 
several  petty  Frankish  kings.  By  combined  force  and  guile  he  soon  sub- 
jected the  others. 

§  14    Disparity  and  Conflict 

Milman,  as  at  §  12.     Gut'zot,  Lect.  vii.    Kaufmann  and  Blanqui,  as  at  §  13.    Freytag, 
Bilder,  I,  2  and  3. 

Social  order  came  slowly.  Some  four  million  Ger- 
mans had  settled  in  a  population  of  from  five  to  ten 
times  their  number.1  Save  in  France,  the  peoples  dif- 
fered in  religion.2  Each,  proud  for  its  own  reasons, 
despised  the  other.  In  the  Romans  of  Gaul  and  Africa, 
fierce  hate  was  added.  They  had  much  cause.3  At 
first  and  for  a  considerable  time,  they  alone  were  taxed  ; 
the  Germans  alone  bore  arms.  Courts,  in  German  hands, 
favored  Germans.  The  Wehrgeld^  of  a  Frank  was  twice 
that  of  a  Roman.  A  Roman,  for  illegally  seizing  and 
binding  a  Frank,  had  to  pay  twice  the  penalty  required 
of  the  Frank  for  the  same  offence  to  him.  The  Ostro- 
goths and  Burgundians  did  not  so  distinguish.  Rich 
Romans,  also  such  as  entered  the  Heerbaun,  speedily 
bettered  their  condition.  Poor  Germans,  on  the  other 
hand,  by  the  same  process  as  poor  Romans  earlier,5  soon 
became  virtual  serfs.  Besides  ignorance,  the  system  of 
fines  and  of  military  service   specially  contributed  to 


122  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

such  poverty.6  In  what  proportion  Roman  elements 
prevailed  in  the  new  social  fabric  is  still  a  question. 
In  general,  Roman  influences  dominated  language, 
agriculture,  the  mechanic  arts,  business  arrangements, 
contracts,  and  the  like,  also  all  municipal  affairs, 
and  all  intellectual  and  ecclesiastical  life  ;  while  mili- 
tary and  civil,  including  judicial,  administration  became 
Germanic.  By  this  latter  means,  in  great  part,  the 
Germanic  idea  of  personal  liberty  has  pervaded  Europe 
and  America,  modifying  every  modern  law  and  con- 
stitution." 

1  This  is  Kaufmann's  estimate.  It  embraces  Franks,  Vandals,  Burgun- 
dians  and  both  families  of  the  Goths. 

2  The  statement  reckons  Burgundians  as  Franks.  These  alone  of  the 
Germanic  kingdoms  had  become  catholic.  The  others,  so  far  as  con- 
verted, were  Arians.     See  §  17. 

8  On  the  German  treatment  of  the  Romans,  by  whom,  of  course,  all 
the  old  subjects  of  the  empire  are  meant,  evidence  seems  conflicting,  per- 
haps because  we  cannot  exactly  date  our  data.  Roth  thinks  that  even  in 
France  it  was  good  from  the  first.  Fustel  de  Coulanges  makes  note  of  a 
jury,  as  it  virtually  was,  which  in  these  troubled  times  consisted  of  4  Goths, 
3  Franks,  and  1 1  Romans,  sitting  side  by  side  and  pronouncing  sentence 
according  to  the  personal  law  of  the  defendant.  He  believes  that  the 
extra  Wehrgeld  law  was  local  or  quite  temporary  in  its  action.  It  is 
certain  that  Theodoric's  government  used  partiality  not  against  Romans 
but  rather  for  them,  and  that  race  hostility  even  in  France  was  mostly 
gone  by  end  of  6th  century.  The  example  of  the  Burgundians,  who  ad- 
mitted the  old  population  to  equal  rights  with  themselves,  influenced  the 
Franks.  Gregory  of  Tours  represents,  about  590,  Romans  in  the  highest 
social  class,  even  in  the  king's  service,  and  honored  with  a  Wehrgeld  of 
300  solidi.  '  Lombard  '  came  to  mean  any,  Romans  included,  who  fought 
and  held  land. 

4  '  Ward-off-money.'  —  See  §  9,  n.  2.  Of  a  murdered  Frank,  if  a  land- 
holder, it  was  200  solidi,  if  landless,  100;  of  a  Roman,  if  a  land-possessor, 
ico,  if  not,  45.  The  solidus  is  thought  to  have  been  worth  at  this  time 
about  $4.50. 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  123 

5  See  §  6,  n.  2. 

6  On  fines,  see  n.  4,  and  Kaufmann,  II,  209.  They  were  affixed  to  all 
sorts  of  misdemeanors,  always  terribly  high.  The  Salic  law  fines  the  theft 
of  a  knife  15  solidi,  that  of  the  iron  parts  of  a  mill,  45.  But  these  enor- 
mous mulcts  are  partly  explained  by  the  exceeding  scarcity  of  iron.  Mili- 
tary service  impoverished  in  that  the  Heerbann  was  called  out  incessantly, 
often  in  seed-time,  often  in  mid-harvest,  leaving  crops  to  rot. 

7  German  shaped  Romance  speech  but  little,  and  mostly  in  Italy.  Cf. 
It.  gonfalone  [flag],  and  gonfalonier e  fr.  German  Gundfano ;  marchese 
[Fr.  and  Eng.  marquis']  fr.  Marca  ;  scabino  [a  justice :  Fr.  echevin~\  fr. 
Schoeffe ;  mondualdo  [guardian]  fr.  Mundwald ;  the  words  '  France,' 
'  French,'  '  Lombardy,'  '  Lombards,'  '  Allemagne '  and  '  allemand.'  But 
the  Italians  say  •  Germania,'  though  '  Tedesco '  is  It.  for  '  Teutsch.' 
Spanish  dalera  fr.  Thaler.  Guadagnare,  to  gain,  is  fr.  old  high  Germ. 
weidanjan.  The  most  interesting  example  is  bourgeois  [burgess,  borough, 
etc.]  fr.  Burger.  The  Germans  had  no  word  for  civis  because  no  cities. 
To  translate  it  they  coined  Burger  from  Burg,  a  stronghold.  Borgo, 
name  for  the  locality  of  the  Vatican  at  Rome,  may  have  first  been  '  Burg,1 
called  so  by  German  pilgrims.  It.  '  bando  '  =  our  '  ban,'  may  be  fr.  Ger. 
Bann. 

§   15     Constitutional  Results 

von  Schulte,  Reichs-  u.  Rechts-geschichte,  89  sqq.      Sohm,  Reichs-  u.  GerichUv 
fassung.    Fustel  de  Coulanges,  Hist,  des  Inst,  politiques  de  Vancienne  France. 

Two  changes  consequent  upon  the  mixture  were  spe- 
cially momentous  :  I  The  king  assumed  a  new  charac- 
ter, becoming  hereditary  and  practically  absolute.  In 
the  confusion  incident  to  settlement  he  was  left  to  decide 
many  questions  normally  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
assembly.  This  became  precedent.  Further,  to  the 
Romans  he  took  the  emperor's  place,  which  both  greatly 
elevated  German  ideas  of  kingship  and  gave  the  king 
immense  influence  in  ecclesiastical  affairs.1  2  To  the 
old  nobility  of  blood  succeeded  a  new,  based  on  relation 
to  the  king.  Its  ranks  varied  a  little  with  nations.  In 
France,  each  province  had  its  '  Graf,'  comes  or  count,  and 


124  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

its  '  hundreds '  with  their  '  centenaries,'  the  Graf  being 
both  judge  and  administrator.  Over  Grafs  stood  lHer- 
zoge?  duces  or  dukes,  each  representing  the  king  for 
several  provinces.2  The  two  higher  of  these  functions, 
passing  exactly  as  in  the  later  empire,  through  the  stages 
of  service,  ordinary  office  and  hereditary  office,  became 
the  mere  marks  of  nobility.  Other  changes  were  :  (i) 
increasing  insignificance  and  desuetude  of  the  popular 
assembly,3  (2)  degradation  of  the  comitatus  from  com- 
panions to  dependents,4  (3)  assumption  of  territorial  re- 
lations by  the  government,5  (4)  alleviation  of  slavery.6 

1  Thus  the  king  called  councils  and  exercised  general  oversight  over 
the  church. 

2  The  titles  '  duke '  and  '  count '  have  been  in  constant  use  ever  since 
old-Roman  days.  In  Constantine's  time  *  count,'  comes  or  companion  was 
a  mere  name  of  respect,  bestowed  on  many  duces  or  military  commanders 
and  on  almost  all  other  officers,  whether  civil  or  military.  It  denoted  no 
special  rank,  yet  must  have  become  in  some  sense  higher  than  dux,  since 
it  grew  to  be  the  official  term  for  addressing  the  duces  who  bore  it.  A 
military  comes,  i.e.,  was  higher  than  a  mere  dux.  The  stormy  experiences 
of  early  Frankish  settlement  naturally  gave  to  the  military  function,  and 
hence  to  the  military  name,  the  greater  exaltation.  Besides,  there  is  some 
evidence  that  these  offices  had  old  Frankish  originals,  and  were  not  mere 
continuations  of  the  Roman.  Especially  would  the  word  '  Graf '  indicate 
this,  being  new  and  non-Latin.  '  Province '  [=  *  Gau ']  is  here  used  not 
In  the  crisp  sense  of  Constantine's  day,  yet  the  old-Roman  governmental 
organization  evidently  helped  furnish  the  pattern  for  this.  Centenaries 
were  the  Grafs  executive  officers.  The  Herzog's  position  did  not  pre- 
vent his  having  a  Grafs  jurisdiclio  over  the  immediate  locality  of  his 
residence.  Also  the  Graf  had  a  certain  degree  of  military  authority, 
and  the  Markgraf,  comes  limitis  or  count  of  the  border,  possessed  it  as 
fully  as  a  Herzog.  In  Thuringia  and  other  distant  parts  dukes  were  prac- 
tically independent  till  Karl  Great  humbled  them. 

3  Never  entirely  disused.  So  the  champs  de  Mars,  and  later,  through 
change  of  calendar,  the  champs  de  Mai,  under  the  Merovingian  house. 
But  these  were  never  truly  popular,  like  those  of  barbaric  days,  nor  ever 


THE   DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  125 

decisive  like  those,  being  at  most  only  concurrent  in  authority  with  the 
will  of  the  king.  Noteworthy  is  the  assembly  at  Soissons  in  752,  which 
elects  Pippin  III  king  [§  18],  swearing  under  pain  of  excommunication 
never  to  elect  a  king  not  sprung  from  his  loins.  We  see  by  this  that  the 
idea  of  election  in  connection  with  kingship  had  not  perished.  From 
about  575  the  un-Germanic  custom  of  crowning  kings  and  queens  was 
observed. 

4  Naturally  when  the  chief  settled  down  to  agriculture  his  followers 
became  his  tenants,  some  for  better,  others  for  worse. 

5  None  of  the  barbarian  kings  had  been  strictly  kings  of  lands  but  of 
peoples.  Theodoric,  e.g.,  was  not  king  of  Italy  but  of  the  East  Goths.  — 
Freeman,  Hist'l  Geog.,  96.  The  peace  was  the  '  king's  peace.'  Law  was 
not  the  '  law  of  the  land  '  but  the  law  of  the  tribe. 

6  Slave  importation  ceasing,  slaves  became  more  valuable  and  were 
treated  better. 

§  16    The  Culmination 

Guizot,  Civilization  in  Europe,  ii,  iii,  v,  vi. 

The  Roman  empire  at  its  best  presents  a  spectacle  of 
an  absolute  state,  of  order  without  freedom.1  By  500,  its 
order  has  succumbed  to  disorder,  which  is  already  dire 
and  threatens  fearful  increase.  New  kingdoms  are  as 
yet  infirm.  Orthodox,  Arian  and  heathen,  often  really 
varying  in  little  save  name,  are  perpetually  in  fierce 
mutual  strife.  German  individualism,  as  of  old,  defies 
rule  of  law,  encouraged  now  in  this  perversity  by  two 
doctrines  intrinsically  good,  learned  from  the  church,  (1) 
that  of  the  right,  still  recognized  at  least  in  theory,  of 
the  people  to  take  part  in  electing  bishops,  (2)  that  of 
conscience  2  as  an  authority  superior  to  all  human.  Thus 
has  begun  that  mighty  anarchic  movement  destined  to 
culminate  at  length  in  feudalism,  the  negation  of  both 
order  and  freedom.  But,  efficient  relic  of  Roman  civi- 
lization, a  powerful  tendency  toward  centralization  is 
already  at  work  in  both  church  and  state,  certain  to  pro- 


126  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 

duce  immense  results  in  time.  A  synthesis  is  beginning 
between  the  two  conflicting  tendencies,  which,  though 
it  will  first,  to  good  purpose,  renew  absolute  monarchy 
both  ecclesiastical  and  political,  will  finally  evoke  the 
constitutional  state,  assuring  order  and  freedom  to- 
gether. The  healthy  crystallization  begins  with  the 
rise  of  the  Frankish  kingdom. 

1  Observe  that  it  is  no  contradiction  when  private  Roman  law  is  praised 
and  public  stigmatized  as  despotic. 

'2  '  Conscience  and  honor  are  conceptions  which  ancient  society  knew 
nothing  about.' — Taine.    They  were  built  up  by  Christianity. 

§  iy    The  Beginnings  of  France 

Gibbon,  xxxviii.    Milman,  as  at  §  12.     Duruy,  41  sqq.    Freeman  [Hist.  Ess.,  1  ser.], 
'  The  Franks  and  the  Gauls.'    Arnold,  Frankische  Zeit,  ii.    de  Coulanges,  as  at  §  15. 

Among  the  new  kingdoms  that  of  the  Franks,  many- 
wise  least  promising  at  first,  was  alone  destined  to  per- 
manence. Its  superior  strength  lay  in  the  facts  (i)  that 
it  was  not  a  transplanted  kingdom,  (2)  that  it  was  catho- 
lic.1 The  omnipotent  clergy  prepared  and  aided  all  its 
conquests.  Merovingian  history  had  four  periods  : 2  1 
Conquest,  by  Chlodovech  and  his  sons,  to  the  first  re- 
union, under  Lothar  I.  At  Chlodovech's  death  his 
kingdom  embraced  all  Gaul  save  Burgundy,  Septimania 
and  Armorica,  besides  a  district  beyond  the  Rhine.  In 
accordance  with  German  custom  it  was  divided  among 
his  four  sons,  who  further  extended  it  over  the  Thurin- 
gians,  the  Burgundians,  the  Bavarians  and  Provence,3  so 
that  Lothar  I  ruled  a  realm  twice  as  large  as  his  father's. 
2  Turmoil  and  inner  feuds,  to  the  second  reunion,  under 
Lothar  II.  Note  in  this  period  the  strifes  and  worth- 
lessness  of  the  kings,  the  incipient  sundering  of   new 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  127 

nationalities,  the  onsets  of  Avars  and  Lombards,  the 
power  and  insubordination  of  the  great  nobles.  3  Rela- 
tive order,  the  Merovingian  house  at  its  apogee,  under 
Lothar  II  and  Dagobert.  Their  sway  reaches  from 
the  Elbe  and  Inn  to  the  Bay  of  Biscay,  the  forms  of 
law  are  better  observed,  civil  wars  cease,  vassals  obey. 
4  The  Merovingian  power  declines,  the  causes  being 
those  mentioned  in  2,  which  begin  again  to  show  their 
effects  even  before  Dagobert's  death. 

1  Gregory  of  Tours,  Hist.  Francorum,  II,  30,  thus  naively  tells  the 
story  of  Chlodovech's  conversion :  '  The  queen  [Clotilda]  did  not  cease 
preaching  to  the  king  to  recognize  the  true  God  and  neglect  idols,  but  no 
resource  could  move  him  to  these  until  once  he  was  making  war  upon  the 
Alamans  and  was  forced  to  confess,  as  the  two  armies  struggled,  that  the 
foe  were  cutting  down  his  men  at  a  terrific  rate  and  that  their  utter  de- 
struction was  imminent.  Seeing  this  he  lifted  his  eyes  to  heaven,  and, 
pricked  in  heart  and  moved  to  tears,  said :  O  Jesus  Christ,  whom  Clotilda 
preaches  as  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  who  dost  declare  that  thou  givest 
aid  to  them  that  labor  and  victory  to  them  that  hope  in  thee,  I  devotedly 
beseech  the  glory  of  thy  assistance,  that  if  thou  shalt  indulge  me  with 
victory  over  these  enemies  and  I  shall  find  in  thee  that  virtue  which  the 
people  of  thy  name  profess  that  they  have  proved,  I  may  believe  in  thee 
and  be  baptized  in  thy  name.  For  I  have  invoked  my  gods  only  to  find 
that  they  are  far  off  from  helping  me;  wherefore  I  believe  them  power- 
less, not  succoring  those  who  obey  them.  Thee  now  I  invoke  and  in  thee 
I  desire  to  believe;  only  save  me  from  my  adversaries.'  He  goes  on  to 
relate  the  speedy  victory  and  the  baptism.  At  this  St.  Remigius  officia- 
ted, using  to  Chlodovech  the  words :  Mitis  depone  colla  Sigamber,  adora 
quod  iticendisfi,  incende  quod  adorasti. 

2  511,  Chlodovech  dies.  558-561,  reunion  under  Lothar  I.  613-628, 
reunion  under  Lothar  II.     638,  Dagobert  dies. 

3  For  the  geography  see  Freeman,  Hist'l  Geog.,  121  sqq. 


128  THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME 


§  1 8     Rise  of  the  Carolingian  House 

Milman,  IV,  ix-xi.  StilU,  iii.  Duruy,  I,  v.  Arnold,  as  at  §  17.  Guizot,  Civiliza 
tion  in  France,  xix.  Bonnell.  An/'dnge  d.  kar.  Houses.  Oehner,  Jahrb.  d. 
frank.  Reichs  unter  Konig  Pippin. 

There  was  no  de  facto  Merovingian  king  after  Dago- 
bert,  but  the  real  kings  were  the  maiorcs  domus.  The 
origin  of  their  office  is  obscure.  The  maior  domus  first 
appears  in  course  of  the  sixth  century,  as  a  mere  officer 
of  the  royal  household,  with  no  rule  and  no  authority  in 
the  government  save  through  influence  over  the  king. 
Subsequently  the  office  has  marvellous  development.1 
1  Incumbents  of  it  are  guardians  of  royal  minors,  and 
as  these  are  numerous  and  many  of  them  imbecile  when 
of  age,  the  guardianship  merges  into  a  premiership  of 
the  kingdom.  2  After  613  the  maiores  domus  of  Bur- 
gundy and  Austrasia  succeed  there  the  former  kings, 
ruling  for  Dagobert  over  even  the  dukes  in  those  realms, 
their  earlier  function  being  entirely  superseded.  3  Pip- 
pin II  attaches  the  office  in  Austrasia  permanently  to 
his  own  family.  4  Martell  makes  himself  maior  domus 
of  the  whole  kingdom.  Merovingians  are  by  this  time 
pure  faineants?  5  Pippin  III  becomes  veritable  king. 
The  office,  once  grown  important,  naturally  fell  to  the 
nobles,  and  became  matter  of  contention  among  them, 
in  which  contention  the  preeminent  ability  of  the  Caro- 
lingians  brought  them  the  victory.  Martell's  success 
may  also,  to  an  extent,  be  viewed  as  a  triumph  of  Aus- 
trasian3  over  Neustrian  society.  Pippin's  revolutionary 
step,  for  which  his  powerful  personality  and  will  pre- 
pared him,  was  rendered  safe  and  even  imperative  by 
the  concurrence   of  people   and   pope.      This   popular 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  .       1 29 

judgment,  the  decisive  consideration,  was  due  to  the 
unparalleled  services  of  Pippin,  his  brother,  and  his 
father,  in  bringing  unity,  tranquillity,  and  enlargement 
to  the  realm.  They  had  repelled  the  Mohammedans, 
exalted  Frankish  over  ducal  authority  in  all  directions, 
and  well  begun  the  conquest  of  the  Saxons.  If  they 
had  robbed  the  church  of  temporal  goods,4  they  had 
furthered  its  unity  and  its  discipline,  and  forced  it  to 
conform  more  to  its  profession. 

1  622-c.'38,  Pippin  I,  of  Landen.  640-'56,  his  son,  Grimwald.  687- 
714,  his  nephew,  Pippin  II,  of  Heristal,  grandson  of  I.  720-'4i,  his  son, 
Karl  Martell.  732,  Battle  of  Poitiers  [Tours].  751  ('52)  Marten's  son, 
Pippin  III  [le  Bref],  king. 

2  Childeric  III  speaks  of  Karlmann  [Carloman],  Marten's  son,  Pippin 
Ill's  brother,  as  '  the  maior  domus  who  has  set  us  on  the  throne.'  The  maior 
domus  is  hailed  as  the  one  '  to  whom  the  Lord  God  has  entrusted  the  care 
of  the  kingdom.'     Pippin  III  speaks  of  'our  kingdom'  ere  yet  king. 

3  Austrasia  meant  the  east  or  northeast  part  of  the  Frankish  land,  Neustria 
the  west  and  southwest,  but  the  line  between  thorn  was  mobile.  The  origin 
of  the  name  '  Neustria '  is  unknown.  On  boundaries  etc.  of  Burgundy, 
Bryce,  Appendix  A. 

4  Pious  as  Martell  seemed  to  Gregory  III  [§  19],  the  clergy  of  his  own 
land  consigned  him  to  hell  for  sacrilege.  —  Milman,  vol.  ii,  391. 

§  19    Breach  of  West  with  East 

Gibbon,  chaps,  xlv,  xlix,  Ix.  Milman,  III,  vii,  IV,  vi-ix.  Lea  [in  Studies],  '  Rise  of 
the  Temporal  Power.'  Fisher  [in  Discussions]  '  Temporal  Kingdom  of  the  Popes.' 
Tosti,  storia  delV  origine  dello  scisma  greco,  2  v. 

Contrary  to  his  purpose,  Constantine's  erection  of  a 
New  Rome  had  proved  a  powerful  cause  of  cleavage  in 
the  empire.  Theoretically  harmonious,  the  two  emperors 
were  actually  jealous.  Pope  warred  with  patriarch  on 
each  of  the  numerous  theological  questions  that  arose : 
Nestorianism,1  Monothelitism,  clerical  celibacy,  papal 
supremacy,  images,  the  filioque?  eucharist-bread,  time  of 


I30     -  THE   DISSOLUTION    OF   ROME 

easter.  Notwithstanding  her  loyalty  to  the  Byzantine 
court  it  was  more  or  less  by  its  connivance  that  Alaric  and 
Theodoric  invaded  Italy.  Both  the  difficulty  and  the 
brevity  of  Justinian's  conquest  there  taught  Rome  at 
once  the  necessity  and  the  possibility  of  self-dependence. 
By  568,  fifteen  years  after  the  fall  of  the  Ostrogoths,  North 
Italy  was  at  the  feet  of  the  Lombards.  The  Centre  and 
the  South  remained  professedly  subj  ect  to  Constantinople, 
but  the  dukes  of  Spoleto  and  Benevento  and  the  exarch 
of  Ravenna  were  practically  independent.  At  600  the 
pope  too,  de  hire  under  the  exarch,  was  de  facto  full 
temporal  lord  over  Rome  and  over  a  considerable  terri- 
tory outside.  Gregory  the  Great  (590-604)  at  the  head 
of  his  own  army  leads  in  the  defence  of  Rome  against 
the  Lombards  and  is  styled  dux  plebis,  and  when,  later, 
a  regular  duke  for  Rome  is  appointed  he  figures  as  but 
the  pope's  subaltern.  Already  since  Constantine  a 
landholder,  the  pontiff  was  now  a  sovereign.  Under 
Gregory  II,  715-731,  the  church's  territory  constitutes 
a  formal  ' respublica'  with  its  own  ' exercitus  romanus? 
connection  with  the  emperor  being  purely  nominal.3 
Although  out  of  policy  the  government  of  Rome  was 
till  800  administered  in  the  emperor's  name,  the  de- 
finitive rupture 4  was  occasioned  by  the  iconoclastic  con- 
troversy. Gregory  defends  images,  Emperor  Leo  the 
Isaurian  threatens,  Gregory  defies  him  and  ejects  the  duke 
his  representative,  reconciliation  becomes  impossible. 

1  In  483,  before  this  strife  ended,  Felix  of  Rome  and  Acacius  of  Con- 
stantinople stood  mutually  excommunicate.  Pope  Anastasius  II,  for 
daring  to  doubt  Acacius's  damnation,  missed  place  in  the  canon  of  saints. 
Dante,  Inf.,  canto  xi,  sees  Anastasius  in  hell,  as  the  one  '  whom  out  of  the 
right  way  Photinus  drew.'    I.e.,  he  communed  with  Photinus,  who  was  still 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  131 

in  communion  with  Constantinople.  Anastasius  died  suddenly :  Baronius 
doubts  not  it  was  by  the  hand  of  God.  On  all  these  controversies  see  Ch. 
Ill,  §§  19,  20.  In  the  warm  rencounter  between  Gregory  the  Great  and 
John  the  Faster  it  is  the  Constantinopolitan  who  offends  by  calling  him- 
self '  universal  bishop.'  Gregory  will  not  allow  this  and  assails  his  foe 
with  those  levelling  passages  of  Scripture,  like  Matthew  xxiii,  8  sqq., 
which  protestants  have  used  to  such  purpose  against  papacy.  He  twits 
John  with  fasting  for  effect.  —  Greg.  Mag.  Ep.  V,  xx.  In  the  Monothelite 
quarrel  Pope  Honorius  I  [d.  638]  declared  for  the  single-will  doctrine, 
which  the  VPh  General  Council,  Constantinople,  681/2,  pronounced 
heresy,  cursing  Honorius  by  name.  Yet  that  very  Council  received  from 
H's  successor,  Pope  Agatho,  a  solemn  breve  declaring  all  occupants 
of  St.  Peter's  Chair  infallible.  A.  died  before  hearing  of  H.'s  anath- 
ema, but  Leo  II,  the  next  pope,  agreed  to  the  Council's  decrees  and 
expressly  repeated  the  '  aeterna  condemnatio '  of  heretic  Honorius.  The 
regular  papal  oath  in  the  Liber  diurnus,  Migne,  CV,  p.  52,  names  H. 
among  the  anathematized  heretics.  Hefele,  though  a  catholic,  faithfully 
sets  forth  these  facts,  Conciliengesch.,  III.  He  also  in  his  1st  ed.  drew 
the  conclusion,  which  the  Vatican  decree  of  papal  infallibility  has  apparently 
led  him  to  omit  in  the  second.  See  the  question  handled  by  v.  Schulte, 
the  ablest  catholic  lawyer  in  Europe,  Macht  d.  r'om.  Papste,  25  sqq. 

2  The  Council  of  Toledo,  589,  announced  a  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
as  ex  patre  ET  filio  procedens,  contrary  to  that  of  the  Nicene  Creed,  which 
derives  the  Spirit  from  the  Father  alone.  Various  synods  in  the  West 
discussed  the  innovation,  until  that  of  Aix-la-Chapelle,  809,  boldly  in- 
serted ' filioque '  in  the  Latin  translation  of  that  creed.  The  eastern 
church  has  protested  from  then  till  now. 

8  Such  was  the  rise  of  the  pope's  temporality.  Under  Gregory  II  the 
domain  was  not  more  than  80  miles  by  40  in  extent.  It  was  swollen  by 
donations  from  the  Lombard  kings  and  later  by  Frankish  conquests  from 
the  Lombards,  made  over  to  the  pope.  On  the  spurious  edict  of  donation 
[by  Constantine],  Milman,  vol.  i,  94,  n.,  Gibbon,  vol.  v,  34,  Legge,  Temp'l 
Power  of  the  Popes,  Cutts,  Constantine. 

*  But  not  ecclesiastically  till  the  nth  century,  when  East  opposed, 
West  insisted  upon,  unleavened  bread  for  the  eucharist.  Legates  vainly 
sent  to  Constantinople  to  demand  obedience  retired,  leaving  on  the  great 
altar  of  St.  Sophia  in  the  pope's  name  the  ban :  '  Accursed  be  Michael,  mis- 
called patriarch,  Leo,  bishop  of  Acrida,  and  all  their  followers,  with  those 
of  Simon,  Vales,  Donatus,  Arius,  Nicolaus,  Severus,  and  with  all  the  ene- 
mies of  God  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Manichaeans,  the  Nazarenes  and  all 
heretics,  yea,  with  the  devil  and  his  angels.    Amen.   Amen.   Amen.' 


132  the  dissolution  of  rome 

§  20     Papal  Alliance  with  the  Franks 

Same  auth.  as  last  §.    Also:  Milman,  as  at  §  18.    Creighton,  Popes  during  Reformation, 
I,  Int.    Kaufmann,  bd.  ii,  b.  iii. 

But  Rome  is  not  safe.  The  emperors,  angry,  will  not 
forget ;  the  warlike  Lombards,  barbarous,  and  of  the 
detested  Arian  faith,  are  at  the  door.  The  long  valid 
artifice  of  alternate  leagues  with  the  Lombards  and  the 
dukes  of  Lower  Italy  fails  when  the  powerful  King 
Luitprand,  vowing  to  reduce  all  Italy,  attacks  the 
Eternal  City.  The  Franks  are  now  Rome's  sole  hope. 
Gregory  III  through  a  solemn  embassy  lays  the  golden 
keys  of  St.  Peter's  tomb  at  the  feet  of  Karl  Martell, 
imploring  Frankish  support  in  his  purposed  formal 
declaration  of  independence  from  the  eastern  throne. 
Martell  aids  only  by  diplomacy,  Pippin,1  later,  by  arms. 
Rome  is  permanently  delivered  from  the  Lombards, 
who  still  remain  near  enough  to  shield  it  from  the 
emperor,  and  has  learned  the  taste  of  freedom  from  all 
temporal  lordship.  The  domains  of  the  pope  are  assured 
and  vastly  enlarged,  embracing  now  nearly  the  whole 
exarchate  of  Ravenna.  In  these  negotiations  both 
Franks  and  Lombards  treat  with  the  pope  as  with 
an  independent  sovereign.  This  alliance  between  the 
Carolingians  and  the  popes  was  of  weightiest  conse- 
quence for  the  subsequent  history.  Zachary 2  had 
sanctioned  Pippin's  coup  dVtat,  Pippin  had  freed 
Rome.  Each  side  soon  began  to  prize  what  it  had 
given  above  what  it  had  received.3  On  occasion,  how- 
ever, Rome  learned  to  exalt  also  what  she  had  received. 

1  What  moves  Pippin  is  the  following  letter  from  Pope  Stephen,  in  the 
name  of  St.  Peter :    '  I,  Peter,  the  Apostle  of  God,  who  have  accepted 


THE    DISSOLUTION    OF    ROME  1 33 

you  as  my  sons,  warn  you  to  save  the  city  of  Rome  from  the  Lombards. 
Do  not  endure  that  it  should  longer  be  tormented  by  its  foes,  else  will 
your  bodies  and  your  souls  too  sometime  be  tormented  in  hell  fire.  Do 
not  permit  my  people  to  be  scattered  abroad,  else  will  the  Lord  scatter 
you  abroad  as  he  did  once  the  people  Israel.  Beyond  all  the  other  peo- 
ples of  the  earth  the  Franks  have  shown  themselves  submissive  to  me  the 
Apostle  Peter,  and  on  that  account  I  have  always  heard  their  prayers 
when  they  have  cried  to  me  in  need;  and  I  will  continue  to  give  you  the 
victory  over  your  enemies  if  ye  now  come  quickly  to  the  aid  of  my  city 
Rome.  But  if  ye  disobey  my  injunction,  know  ye  that  in  the  name  of  the 
Holy  Trinity  I  then  exclude  you  from  the  Kingdom  of  God  and  from  eter- 
nal life,  in  virtue  of  the  power  given  me  by  the  Lord  Christ.'  —  Codex  Caro- 
linus,  ep.  iii,  p.  92. 

2  Zachary,  74i-'52,  was  the  last  pope  who  sought  confirmation  from 
the  eastern  emperor.  Pope  Stephen  after  him,  p]S2-'j,  besought  help  from 
the  East,  probably  assured  that  it  would  not  be  rendered,  so  fortifying  his 
excuse  for  calling  the  Franks. 

8  Frederic  Barbarossa  to  Adrian  IV :    '  What  were  your  predecessors 
before   Constantine   and   his   grant,  Karl  Great  and  Otho !  '    Adrian 
Frederic :    '  And  what   a  poor  corner  of  earth  was  your  Germany 
exalted  by  Zachary ! ' 


ors  ^ 

™2 


SELECT    BIBLIOGRAPHY   TO   CHAPTER   V 

Hallam,  Middle  Ages,**  3  v.  Gibbon,  Milman,  Duruy,  Waitz, 
Guizot,  Lea,  Stille,  Schulte,  Bryce.  Sheppard,  Leo,  and  Lewis  con- 
tinued [see  bibliog.  to  IV.  Bryce  is  best  single  vol.  in  Eng.,  Schulte  in 
Germ.],  v.  Giesebrecht,  Gesch.  d.  deutschen  Kaiserzeit**  5  v.  v.  Raumer, 
Gesch.  d.  Hohenstaufen  u.  Hirer  Zeit**  6  v.  Guizot,  Popular  H.  of 
France,*  8  v.;  Masson's  Guizot's  do.,  1  v.  Freeman,  Hist'l  Essays,  i  ser. 
Remington,  Epochs  of  the  Papacy.  Creighton,  Papacy  dg.  Reformation, 
Int.  Villemain,  L.  of  Greg.  VII,**  2  v.  Gfrbrer,  Pabst  Gregorius  VII 
u.  sein  Zeitalter*  7  v.  [from  catholic  pt.  of  view.  Very  full].  Smith 
[P.],  H.  of  the  Christ.  Ch.  dg.  Mid.  Ages,*  2  v.  Maitland,  Dark  Ages  * 
[manyorig.doc.].  Michelet, Moyen  Age*  [in  France],  v.  Ranke,  Well- 
gesch**  Theile,  V-VII;  H.  of  the  Popes,**  3  v.  Trench,  Mediaev.  Ch. 
H.  Prutz  [in  Oncken],  Staatengesch.  d.  Abendlandes  im  Mittelalter, 
I.  Nitzsch,  Gesch.  d.  deulschen  Volkes,  I— III.  [Each  of  last  2  works 
exactly  covers  ground  of  this  Ch.]  Gregorovius,  Rom  im  Mittelalter, 
8  v.  Wattenbach,  Deutsche  Geschichtsquellen  im  Mittelalter**  2  v. 
Dummler,  Gesch.  d.  ostfrank.  Reichs,  2  v.  Alzog  [catholic]  Ch.  H.,* 
3  v.  Dbllinger,  Kaiserthum  Karls  d.  Grossen  u.  sr.  iVach/olger.  Sis- 
mondi,  Hist,  des  republiques  italiennes,**  10  v.  [also  16].  Lehuerou, 
Institutions  Carolingiennes.**  [For  a  list  of  best  histories  of  Germany 
in  English,  Literary  World,  Nov.  17,  1883.] 


CHAPTER  V 

THE   MEDI/EVAL   ROMAN   EMPIRE   OF  THE   WEST 


§  i     The  Ecclesiastical  Unity  of  Europe 

Bright,  Early  Eng.  Ch.  H.  Milman,  IV,  iv,  v.  Lingard,  Anglo-Saxon  Ch.,  ch.  L 
Guizot,  xii-xv.  Neander,  vol.  iii,  75  sqq.,  121  sqq.  Arnold,  Fr'dnkische  Zeit,  iii. 
Maclear,  Merivale,  and  Milman,  in  '  Conversion  of  the  West.' 

To  explain  the  resuscitation  of  Western  Rome,  be- 
sides the  rise  of  a  French  monarchy  and  its  alliance 
with  the  popes,  notice  the  progress  of  ecclesiastical  or- 
ganization in  Europe.  For  two  centuries  after  Chlo- 
dovech  the  Gallic  church  lacked  discipline  and  mis- 
sionary spirit.  It  adhered  loosely  to  the  pope,  did  not 
push  Christianity  with  Frankish  conquest  into  Germany. 
Change  came  from  over  Channel.  The  old-British 
church,  apparently  trampled  out  in  the  Saxon  invasions, 
had  in  Ireland  and  Scotland  from  400  to  600  immense 
development  in  numbers,  learning,  purity  of  faith  and 
life.1  Iona  was  almost  a  British  Rome.  Thence  through 
zealous  missionaries  all  Scotland  and  North  England, 
including  many  of  the  invaders,  received  the  gospel. 
Earnest  preachers  crossed  to  France.  The  seventh 
century  saw  many  Culdee 2  monasteries  built  here  and 
in  Italy,  seats  of  the  best  letters  and  religious  life  these 
lands  had  yet  known.  South  Germany  too  was  evan- 
gelized, Frankish  missionaries  now  assisting,  and  prom- 
ising Christian  beginnings  made  among  the  Thuringians 


I36  THE   MEDIAEVAL   ROMAN   EMPIRE 

and  Saxons.  Meantime  the  new-British  church,3  child 
of  Gregory  the  Great  and  the  papacy,  was  rivalling  the 
old  in  both  growth  and  missionary  enterprise.  It  too 
sent  missionaries  to  the  continent,  among  them  Boni- 
face, the  learned,  enthusiastic,  indefatigable  servant  of 
Rome,  to  Germany  apostle,  to  France  reformer.  Util- 
izing earlier  labors  and  aided  by  Pippin  and  Karlmann, 
this  religious  hero  succeeded,  despite  clerical  apathy 
and  strong  opposition  from  the  old-British  school,4  in 
refining  Christian  faith  and  manners  and  establishing 
firm  papal  sway  to  the  extreme  Frankish  border. 

1  The  noble  lives  and  labors  of  Sts.  Patrick  and  Columba  are  set  forth 
in  Neander,  Milman,  Bright,  and  in  all  the  Ch.  Histories.  Columba,  who 
founded  Iona,  must  be  distinguished  from  Columbanus,  the  leader  of  the 
Irish  mission  to  the  continent,  who  built  the  monasteries  of  Luxeuil  and 
Fontenay  in  France  and  Bobbio  in  Italy.  He  was  accompanied  by  St. 
Gall,  from  whom,  as  founder  of  its  monastery,  the  present  St.  Gall  in 
Switzerland  is  named. 

1  '  Culdee '  is  the  Celtic  '  Keli-de  '  =  ■  men  of  God.' 

3  On  Gregory  the  Great,  Queen  Bertha,  and  the  advent  and  triumph  of 
papal  Christianity  in  Britain,  Milman,  vol.  ii,  175  sqq.,  and  Green,  H.  of 
Eng.  People,  I,  37  sqq.  There  were  for  years  Canterbury  monks  and  Iona 
monks.  In  the  Iona  church  polity  the  monastery  was  the  central  thing. 
Rome  and  Canterbury  had  a  better  organization  and  their  victory  is  not  to 
be  regretted;  yet  Columban  and  Boniface  adopted  and  enforced  on  their 
continental  converts  much  that  was  characteristic  of  the  Iona  system,  as 
heavy  penalties  for  negligence  of  confession  and  mass.  The  same  influ- 
ence may  be  traced  in  the  long  continuance  throughout  the  Frankish 
realm,  of  community  life  on  the  part  of  the  clergy.  At  Karl  Great's  death 
the  parish  system  was  even  in  France  still  far  from  complete,  the  clergy 
living  together  cither  according  to  canonical  rule  or  as  members  of  convents. 

4  Ebrard,  in  his  Irischschottische  Missionskirche  and  his  Bonifalius, 
propounds  the  view  that  the  Culdees  had  a  full  systematic  church  organi- 
zation, wholly  contrary  to  the  Roman,  —  gainsaid  by  Fischer  in  his  Boni- 
falius. The  Culdees  admitted  Rome's  supremacy  in  rank  but  not  in 
authority.  See  further,  Hahn,  Bonifaz  u.  Lul,  and  Funk,  in  the  Hist 
Jahrbticher  [Munich],  IV,  i,  1883. 


of  the  west  1 37 

§  2     Carolus  Imperator 

Guizot,  xx.  Bryce,  iii-v.  Gibbon,  xlix.  Miltnan,  IV,  xii.  Nitzsch,  bd.  i,  193-225. 
Giesebrecht,  bks.  ii,  iii.  Waitz,  vol.  iii,  79  sqq.  Cutts,  Charlemagne.  Einhard, 
L.  of  do.  [Harper's  Half  Ho.  Ser.]     Freytag,  Bilder,  I,  6. 

In  such  a  condition  of  the  West  Karl  the  Great  came 
to  the  Frankish  throne  in  768.  Society  was  so  brittle 
that,  much  as  his  father  and  grandfather  had  achieved, 
it  still  tasked  Karl's  genius  to  keep  his  kingdom  one. 
But  he  did  this  and  more.  He  (1)  incorporated  with  it 
the  half  independent  Aquitania  and  Bavaria,  (2)  forced 
the  warlike  Avars  to  peace  and  tribute,  (3)  reduced 
Italy,  winning  and  taking  the  title  King  of  the  Lom- 
bards,1 (4)  possessed  himself  of  Spain  to  the  Ebro, 
(5)  completed  the  conquest  of  the  Saxons.  The  fame 
of  these  partly  diplomatic  partly  martial  deeds  filled  the 
earth.  Remote  princes  looked  to  Chlodovech's  suc- 
cessor as  general  arbiter  of  European  affairs.2  To  Karl's 
court  at  Aachen  came  envoys  from  the  eastern  emperor, 
the  caliph  of  Bagdad,3  the  patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  from 
Mauritania,  Moorish  and  Christian  Spain,  the  Avars  and 
the  Slavs.  He  had  but  to  appear  at  Rome,  signifying 
his  wish  therefor,  and  his  imperial  election  and  corona- 
tion ensued  as  of  course.  On  Christmas  day,  800,  in  the 
great  Basilica  of  St.  Peter,4  rising  from  prayer  at  the 
high  altar,  while  shouts  of  ■  Carolo  vita  et  victoria '  as- 
cended from  the  great  congregation,  Karl  received  at 
the  hands  of  Leo  III  an  imperial  crown.  This  act,  iQ 
strictness  as  revolutionary,6  though  justifiable,  as  it  was 
momentous,6  contemplated  the  empire  as  one,  Karl  the 
successor  of  Constantine  VI,  Constantine  I  and  Au- 
gustus. Such  was  the  theory  of  the  renewed  empire 
through  all  the  succeeding  centuries.7 


I38  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

1  Pippin  had  only  been  their  overlord.  Schnorr  has  taken  Karl's  vic- 
tory over  Desiderius,  at  Pavia,  as  subject  for  one  of  his  great  cartoons  in 
the  Johanneum  at  Dresden.  The  others  relating  to  Karl  are :  Stephen 
blessing  him  at  the  age  of  12,  his  Saxon  victory  at  Fritzlar,  the  conversion 
of  the  Saxons,  the  Frankfort  Synod,  and  the  Roman  coronation. 

2  Ethelred  of  England  resided  long  at  Karl's  court. 

8  The  famous  Haroun  Alraschid.  Abdurrahman  was  now  Ommiad 
caliph  of  Cordova  in  Spain. 

4  Predecessor  of  the  present  St.  Peter's,  on  the  same  spot.  It  had  been 
built  by  Constantine. 

6  Neither  the  Roman  election,  so-called,  nor  the  papal  coronation  was 
a  source  of  legitimacy.  Irene,  just  then  upon  the  eastern  throne,  was  a 
usurper,  female  succession  being  unknown  to  imperial  law.  —  Gibbon,  IV, 
586.  Karl  fully  understood  the  irregularity  of  his  proceeding,  which  prob- 
ably explains  the  unwillingness  to  be  crowned  ascribed  to  him  by  Einhard. 
He  recognized  Nicephorus  and  even  sought  marriage  with  Irene.  —  Waitz, 
vol.  iii,  171.     See  note  7,  below. 

6  Yet  Einhard  in  his  [official]  Vita,  makes  next  to  nothing  of  this 
crowning.  Evidently  Aix-la-chapelle  and  Karl  himself  deemed  German 
kingship  practically  of  more  consequence  than  the  Roman  imferium. 

7  Waitz,  vol.  iii,  199  sqq.,  questions  this,  and  certainly  ideas  respecting 
the  relation  of  the  new  empire  to  the  old  were  then  most  unclear;  but  the 
very  meaning  of  the  election  and  coronation,  in  view  of  the  theory  of  the 
old  empire,  implied  the  engrafting  of  Karl  upon  the  acknowledged  imperial 
stock.  Soon,  however,  there  came  to  be  two  empires,  an  eastern  and  a 
western,  in  a  sense  different  from  that  applicable  under  Arcadius  and 
Honorius.  Karl  began  by  claiming  Sicily  and  Lower  Italy  for  the  West,  but 
in  return  for  recognition  by  the  East  relinquished  these,  with  Dalmatia  and 
Venice.  An  analogue  to  Karl's  imperial  succession  is  found  in  that  of  the 
Seleucidae  to  Alexander.  A  seal  ascribed  to  800  reads :  renovatio  imperii 
ro/nani.  Dante,  De  Monarchia,  bk.  ii,  assumes  without  argument  that  the 
empire  of  his  time  [1263-1321]  is  the  strict  continuation  of  the  old  Roman. 
Cf.  Sheppard,  496  sqq. 

§  3    His  Government 

See  lit.  to  §  2,  esp.  Gibbon,  and  Waitz,  vol  iii,  333  sqq.     Guizot,  xxi.     Arnold,  Fran' 
kische  Zeit,  iv.    Nitzsch,  as  at  §  2.     Vintry,  Impots  romains  du  vi  au  x  siecle. 

Karl  was  far  greater  as  conqueror  and  diplomatist 
than  as  lawgiver,  in  personal  force  and  tact  than  in 


OF   THE    WEST  1 39 

large  and  statesmanlike  plans.1  Note  his  project  to  leave 
his  realm  divided,  his  recognition  of  the  eastern  em- 
peror, his  ambiguous  and  perilous  relation  to  the  papacy.2 
While  restoring  the  empire  he  made  no  effort  to  repro- 
duce its  unity,  law  or  system  of  administration.  Italy 
and  Saxony  remained  separate  kingdoms.3  The  genius 
as  well  as  the  form  of  the  government  continued  Ger- 
manic :  the  people  the  army,  no  salaried  governmental 
functionaries,  national  assemblies,  not  without  influence 
on  legislation.4  Yet  rule  was  chiefly  personal,  the  em- 
peror practically  absolute.  Legislation  and  the  admin- 
istration of  justice  were  little  systematic,  capitularies 
regarded  momentary  needs,  flagrant  wrongs,  especially 
bribery  and  favoritism,  went  unpunished.  Karl's  great 
merit  lay  in  imparting  strength  and  centralization  to 
public  authority.  Herzogs  were  humbled,  their  office 
made  mobile.  The  eastern,  northern  and  Spanish  fron- 
tiers were  guarded  by  a  line  of  Marks,  each  under  its 
Markgraf  or  margrave,  more  independent  and  powerful 
than  the  simple  Graf.  The  Grafs  judicial  function 
passed  to  a  new  official,  the  judex,  whose  district  or 
lfiscus '  might  cover  several  Graf -districts.  A  most  im- 
portant new  officer  was  the  missus  dominions,  the  em- 
peror's special  representative.  Two  at  least  of  these  he 
yearly  appointed  to  act  for  him  in  each  grand  division 
of  the  empire  with  full  authority.  They  held  courts 
and  assemblies,  superintended  cloister-schools  and  com- 
pelled all  high  servants  of  both  church  and  state  to  their 
duties.  They  were  especially  charged  to  secure  justice 
to  the  poor.  Through  these  courts  and  the  emperor's 
own,  judicial  procedure  was  simplified,  greatly  to  the 
advancement  of  equity.5 


140        THE  MEDIEVAL  ROMAN  EMPIRE 

1  Waitz,  as  above,  has  an  interesting  and  learned  note  giving  the  views 
of  all  the  greatest  writers  upon  this  famous  man,  as  to  his  worthiness  of 
place  beside  Caesar,  Alfred  and  others.  Gibbon's,  vol.  v,  44  sqq.,  is  the 
correct  view.  Even  in  war  the  Saxons  were  nearly  Karl's  match,  opposing 
him  successfully  for  33  years.  Roncesvalles  was  a  confessed  defeat,  and, 
much  to  our  surprise,  Karl  did  not  face  the  Mohammedans  again. 

2  Karl's  idea,  the  regular  one  among  the  Germans,  was  to  divide  his 
realm  at  his  death  among  his  three  sons,  and  he  would  have  done  so,  had 
not  the  two  elder,  Karl  and  Pippin,  died  before  him,  leaving  Louis  the 
Pious  to  inherit  alone.  Recognition  of  the  East  [§  2,  n.  7]  was  now 
logically  an  admission  that  Karl's  imperatorship  was  abnormal.  On  his 
relation  to  the  pope,  see  next  §. 

3  The  Italian  army  mustered  by  itself.  Saxony  was  less  dependent  than 
Italy,  but  paid  no  tribute  to  the  empire. 

4  Yet  comprising  only  the  great.  The  narrowing  process  had  begun 
which  resulted  in  the  electoral  college,  §  8.    Cf.  Ch.  IV,  §  15,  n.  3. 

5  The  chief  improvements  were  that  i)  the  courts  held  by  the  missi 
used  the  simple  and  direct  methods  of  securing  justice  prevalent  in  the 
king's  personal  court,  of  which  in  fact  they  were  an  extension,  while 
ii)  in  the  local  courts  themselves  certain  select-men,  called  scabini,  were 
appointed  judges,  whose  official  duty  it  was  always  to  be  present  at  the 
stated  assizes.  They  supplanted  for  judicial  purposes  the  popular  local 
assemblies,  which,  though  still  appointed  to  meet  three  times  a  year,  v.  ere 
in  something  the  same  desuetude  as  the  national. 


§  4    His  Relations  with  the  Church 

Bryce,  ch.  v.    Milman,  V,  i.     Guizot,  xxvii.     Nitzsch,  as  at  §  2.    Lehuiron, 
chaps,  ix,  x. 

Karl  was  pope  as  well  as  emperor.1  His  policy  was 
to  reform  the  church  and  to  unify  it  around  Rome  as 
centre,  yet  keeping  it,  including  the  pope  as  its  supreme 
official,  subject  to  himself.  Full  of  theocratic  ideas  and 
lacking  clear  conception  of  the  state  as  possessing  legiti- 
mate function  independently  of  the  church,  he  still  as- 
signed to  the  state  the  higher  place.  The  state  he  con- 
sidered bound  to  further  the  ends  of  the  church  —  thus 


OF    THE   WEST  I4I 

each  of  Karl's  campaigns  was  a  crusade — yet  church 
property  and  office  were  to  be  administered  as  belonging 
to  the  state.  Karl  considered  his  care  as  well  the  doc- 
trine and  life  of  the  clergy  as  external  ecclesiastical 
affairs.  He  exhorts  the  pope  to  a  godly  walk,  opposes 
him  in  doctrinal  matters,  provides  for  no  appeal  to  him 
even  by  ecclesiastics,  takes  the  responsibility  against 
him  of  placing  'filioque ' 2  in  the  creed.  He  forces  both 
incumbent  and  intending  clergy  to  diligent  study,  pro- 
vides for  preaching  in  the  vernacular,3  insists  that  even 
the  laity  know  the  paternoster '4  and  the  creed  and  un- 
derstand the  main  Christian  doctrines.5  He  improved 
the  discipline  and  efficiency  of  monasteries  and  had 
some  success  in  subordinating  them  to  the  bishops.  In 
a  word,  Karl  faithfully  set  forward  the  unfinished  task 
of  Boniface.  This  even  more  than  he  wished  or  was 
aware.  The  church  seemed  docile,  yet  its  conviction  of 
its  relation  to  the  state,  so  different  from  Karl's,  was 
already  a  part  of  its  life,  and  the  new  forces  wherewith 
his  efforts  had  quickened  it,  it  was  destined  to  employ 
to  the  full  in  realizing  that  conception  at  the  expense 
of  his.6 

1  He  was  in  his  time  more  or  less  seriously  called  '  episcopus  episcopo- 
riun?  the  title  which  Tertullian  was  the  first  to  apply  to  the  bishop  of 
Rome.  Einhard  adverts  to  Karl's  assiduous  perusal  of  Augustine's  City 
of  God. 

2  See  Ch.  IV,  §  19,  n.  2,  Bryce,  64;  Milman,  vol.  ii,  500;  Richey, 
Nicene  Creed  and  the  Filioque. 

3  Karl's  time  was  a  great  epoch  in  the  history  of  preaching.  Every 
bishop  was  to  have  a  number  of  sermons  translated  from  the  distinguished 
fathers  into  the  language  of  the  people,  to  be  preached  as  postils  by  the 
ignorant  priests. 

4  Under  penalty  of  whipping.  But  as  enforcement  had  to  be  left  to 
church  authorities,  this  part  of  the  law  amounted  to  little.     Bishops  could 


142  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

for  certain  offences  inflict  stripes  on  their  clergy.  Karl  also  enacted  a  law 
against  work  on  Sunday. 

s  The  emperor  must  have  had  in  all  this  a  genuinely  Christian  aim. 
He  ordered  his  missi  to  ask  bishops  and  abbots  exactly  what  they  meant 
by  renouncing  the  world,  and  by  what  signs  they  told  him  who  renounced 
from  him  who  did  not.  '  Is  it  that  he  does  not  bear  arms  and  is  not 
publicly  married?  Does  he  renounce  the  world  who  toils  each  day,  no 
matter  by  what  means,  to  increase  his  possessions,  now  promising  the 
beatitudes  of  heaven,  now  threatening  the  pains  of  hell?'  Cf.  the  oath 
[Bryce,  65]  which  Karl  made  all  his  subjects  swear  to  him  after  his  crown- 
ing as  emperor.  In  painful  contrast  with  this  healthy  spirit  is  Einhard's 
recital  of  the  theft  by  his  servants,  of  the  bones  and  dust  of  two  saints, 
Marcellinus  and  Peter  Martyr,  in  Rome.  The  servants,  themselves  in  holy 
orders,  after  fasting  and  prayer  for  divine  aid,  burglariously  enter  the 
sacred  tomb,  break  open  the  great  stone  coffin,  snatch  the  strange  plunder 
and  away  across  the  Alps.  It  was  in  827.  Einhard,  directed  by  a  vision, 
bestowed  the  reliques  at  MUhlheim,  whose  name  thence  became  changed 
into  Seligenstadt. 

6  Cf.  §§  12  sqq.;  Milman,  vol.  ii,  484  sqq.,  507  sqq.  Thus  we  see 
the  pseudo-Isidorian  decretals  taking  form  soon  after  Karl's  decease. — 
Milman,  vol.  iii,  58  sqq.  Ranke,  Wcltgesch.  VII,  ch.  v,  is  on  these  de- 
cretals. They  contain  pieces  as  old  as  the  1st  century,  and  increase  grad- 
ually in  number,  till  by  the  middle  of  the  9th  nearly  the  whole  body  is 
present,  though  there  are  additions  after  this.  The  leading  ideas  are 
purity  of  life  in  clergy,  supremacy  of  church  over  state.  Their  genuine- 
ness was  suspected  only  from  the  14th  century  and  disproved  early  in  the 
1 6th  by  their  numberless  anachronisms. 


§  5     His  Aid  to  Culture  and  Letters 

Gutzot,  xxii,  xxiii.  Atullinger,  Schools  of  Charles  Great.  Einhard,  as  at  §  2.  Mon, 
nier,  Alcuin.  Lorens,  Leben  Alcuins.  Milman,  vol.  ii,  508  sq.  Hallavt,  Lit  ol 
Europe,  I,  i.     Wattenbach,  Geschichtsquellen,  I,  105  sqq. 

Himself  scarcely  able  to  write,  the  emperor  was  cause 
of  a  most  powerful  impulse  to  the  intellectual  life  of  his 
time.  The  studies  which  Italy  and  England  had  in  the 
seventh  and  eighth  centuries  preserved  from  an  earlier 
age  and  themselves  sedulously  pursued,  which  Colum- 


OF    THE   WEST  I43 

ban  and  Boniface  had  introduced  in  France  and  Ger- 
many, he  helped  to  a  vigorous  life  and  influence,  re- 
garding effort  of  this  kind  his  duty  to  both  people  and 
church.  The  spirit  of  York  and  Monte  Casino  filled 
the  Frankish  cloisters.  Savans  from  every  land  were 
called  to  court,  as  Einhard,  Paulus  Diaconus,  Alcuin  of 
York,  Peter  of  Pisa.  The  court  school,1  directed  by 
Alcuin  and  attended  by  Karl  with  his  children,  became 
a  centre  of  letters  for  the  realm,  its  pupils,  made  abbots 
and  bishops,  founding  copies  of  it  everywhere.  Text- 
books were  composed;  classics  and  fathers  translated, 
annotated,  learned  by  heart.  For  the  times,  culture  was 
not  narrow.  Einhard  was  historian,  literator,  architect. 
History,  poetry,2  astronomy  and  theology  were  ardently 
cultivated.  On  multitudes  of  questions,  especially  in 
theology  and  ethics,  earnest  discussions  were  had,  formal 
treatises  composed.  Many  studied  critically,  thought 
deeply.  Scotus  Erigena  and  Gottschalk3  were  born  of 
Karl's  age.  In  this  intellectual  movement  the  great 
monarch  participated  personally.  The  healthy  reaction 
in  favor  of  classical  study,  though  originally  due  to 
English  influence,  he  earnestly  patronized.  In  two 
points  his  interposition  was  positive  and  direct,  viz.,  in 
aid  (1)  toward  rendering  German  a  literary  speech,4 
(2)  toward  deepening  and  intensifying  in  the  Germans 
the  conceptions  of  the  Christian  religion. 

1  This  is  a  great  epoch  in  the  history  of  education  also.  Karl's 
daughters  as  well  as  his  sons  attended  the  schola  palatina,  all  pursuing 
the  same  studies. 

2  Much  of  the  poetry  is  rhyme,  putting  it  almost  beyond  doubt  that 
rhyme  was  not  of  Moorish  or  Arabian  origin.  Hallam  [Lit.  of  Eur., 
vol.  i,  32]  thinks  Muratori,  Gray  and  Turner  have  proved  that  r**ym»-d 
Latin  verse  was  in  use  from  the  end  of  the  4th  century. 


144  THE    MEDIAEVAL   ROMAN    EMPIRE 

8  John  Scotus  Erigena  lived  in  the  9th  century,  and  was  the  chief  in- 
tellectual light  of  the  middle  age.  He  knew  Greek,  placed  reason  above 
authority,  and  taught  a  philosophy  verging  toward  pantheism.  Though 
a  Briton  he  passed  most  of  his  active  life  at  the  court  of  Charles  the  Bald, 
dying  about  880.  Gottschalk  was  also  a  9th  century  light,  dying  in  868. 
His  fame  rests  upon  his  advocacy,  costing  him  his  life,  of  the  predestina- 
tion-doctrine taught  by  St.  Augustine  [Ch.  Ill,  §  19].  In  one  point  he 
went  beyond  Augustine,  viz.,  in  teaching  predestination  to  damnation  as 
well  as  to  salvation.     On  both  these  men,  Guizot,  xxviii,  xxix. 

4  He  made  the  first  attempt  at  a  German  grammar,  gave  German  names 
to  the  winds  and  months  and  collected  those  old  German  hero-songs, 
'  which,  having  passed  through  the  Latin  verse  of  the  monks,  came  forth  at 
length  as  the  Nibelungen  and  the  Heldenbuch.'  For  Karl's  influence  in 
germanizing  religious  thought,  see  last  §.  For  tht  nyths  concerning 
him,  Bulfinch,  Legends  of  Charlemagne.  Reckoning  from  the  Christian 
era  now  begins,  also  the  opening  of  the  year  at  Christmas  instead  of 
March  1,  which  had  been  the  custom  of  the  Franks.  January  1  did  not 
begin  the  year  till  the  16th  century. 

§  6    The  Empire  after  Karl 

Guizot,  xxiv.     Bryce,  passim.     Giesebrecht,  bks.  iii-v.     Schulte,  Anhang  IV. 
Nitzsck,  bd.  i,  226  to  end. 

The  empire  thus  renewed  became  an  integral  part  of 
the  world's  order,  lasting  nominally  at  least,  till  1806, 
and  through  its  fortunes  lending  main  content  and  in- 
terest to  European  history  for  many  centuries,  till  it 
was  obscured  by  the  growth  of  kingdoms  within  its  own 
bosom  and  outlying.  Notice  five  periods ;  i  The  Caro- 
lingian-Italian,  to  Otho  the  Great,  962. 1  Marked  de- 
pression supervenes,  the  empire  surrendering  its  vigor, 
almost  its  life.  ii  The  Saxon-Fmnconian.  to  Henry2 
IV,  1056.  Renewal  comes.  The  emperor's  supremacy 
over  the  pope  is  asserted,  admitted  ana  maintained. 
The  new  prosperity  continued  long  :  Henry  III,  1039- 
'56,  saw  the  empire  at  its  loftiest  eminence,      iii  The 


OF   THE   WEST  1 45 

Hohenstaufen,  to  the  Interregnum  of  1254-' 73.  The 
supremacy  spoken  of  is  asserted  but  not  admitted  or 
maintained.3  Here  fall  the  crusades,  also  the  terrible 
struggles  of  Henry  IV,  Frederic  I  and  II  with  the 
papacy,  which  now,  under  Hildebrand  and  Innocent 
III,  puts  in  practice  those  absolutist  principles  which 
have  been  developing  since  Augustine  and  Leo  the 
Great,  iv  The  Earlier-Hapsburg,  to  the  Reformation, 
1520.  The  emperor  is  fully  subject  to  the  pope,  yet 
still  possessing  considerable  though  declining  power. 
To  this  decline  the  Renaissance  greatly  contributed, 
v  The  Later-Hapsburg,^  to  Francis  II's  abdication,  1806. 
The  empire  is  much  of  this  time  little  more  than  a 
name. 

1  This  is  the  date  of  his  coronation  as  emperor.  He  became  king  in 
936.  v.  Sybel  connects  this  terrible  anarchy  with  the  then  universal  belief 
that  the  end  of  the  world  would  come  about  the  year  1 000.  On  this 
period,  see  §  7. 

2  We  end  the  period  here,  with  Henry  III,  as  a  natural  turning-point, 
but  of  course  Henry  IV  and  Henry  V  also  belonged  to  the  great  Franco- 
nian  or  Salian  house,  Conrad  III,  1138-1152,  being  the  first  Hohenstaufen 
or  Swabian  emperor.     Frederic  I,  the  Barbarossa,  was  Conrad's  nephew. 

3  It  came  nearest  to  being  maintained  under  Frederic  I,  U52-'90,  but 
even  he  had  to  recede.     See  §  18. 

4  After  the  Great  Interregnum,  all  the  emperors  were  of  the  Hapsburg 
house  except  Henry  VII  [Bavaria]  and  Francis  I  [Lorraine],  husband  of 
Maria  Theresa.  Joseph  II  and  Leopold  II,  their  sons,  and  Francis  II, 
their  grandson,  are  to  be  sure  usually  reckoned  to  the  house  of  Lorraine, 
but  were,  through  Maria  Theresa,  of  Hapsburg  blood. 


140      the  medieval  roman  empire 
§  7  Otho  the  Great 

Bryce,  vi,  ix.    Milman,V,  esp.  xi.     Secretan,  Feodalite ,  qo  s<\.    Prutz,  I,  II. 
Ranke,  Weltgesch.,  VI,  ch.  xv.     Lehuerou,  ch.  xi. 

Powerfully  as  Karl  the  Great's  reign  has  affected  all 
political  evolution  since,1  the  age  immediately  following 
his  was  one  of  deplorable  reaction,  of  anarchy  worse 
than  that  to  which  he  had  succeeded  in  setting  term, 
a  profound  night,  wherein,  though  present,  the  princi- 
ples of  order  for  a  moment  realized  by  him  eluded  men's 
grasp  and  gaze.  None  of  his  successors  were  his  peers, 
the  earliest  the  least  so.  Henry  the  Fowler,  9I9~'36, 
was  the  first  to  remind  of  him.  Europe  now  in  the 
utmost  political  distraction  :  West  Francia  permanently 
separate  from  East,2  neither  one  a  unity  even  by  itself, 
onsets  by  Saracens,  Avars  and  Normans  so  incessant 
and  terrific  that  the  empire  hardly  survives.  Several 
German  kings  forego  the  imperial  dignity,  still  a  larger 
number  disgrace  it.  Henry  the  Fowler  having  brought 
a  good  degree  of  order  to  the  German  kingdom,  his 
greater  son,  Otho,  936-'73,  not  only  completes  this  work 
but  crosses  the  Alps  to  claim  and  receive  the  Caesars' 
crown,  962.  In  effect  Otho  created  the  empire  anew 
as  truly  as  Karl,  though  his  act  was  far  less  decisive 
theoretically.  Constitutionally  considered  his  empire 
only  continued  Karl's,  whose  programme  Otho  exactly 
pursued  in  all  its  main  features :  conquest,  enforce- 
ment of  order,  mastery  and  direction  of  the  church. 
The  papacy,  grown  weak  and  base,3  he  dominated  and 
purified. 

1  The  ideal  which  Karl  had  realized  for  an  instant  never  completely 
passed  from  view.     The  formal  unity  of  the  political  world  was  not  kept 


OF    THE    WEST  147 

up,  that  of  the  ecclesiastical  lost  much  of  its  perfection.  Yet  but  for  the 
immortal  Carolingian,  without  that  half-century  of  glory  and  relative  order 
which  he  gave  to  the  West,  and  of  which  the  living  memory  was  always 
retained,  who  can  say  whether  Europe  and  the  whole  world  with  it  would 
not  have  been  re-entombed  in  that  savage  state,  defying  history  and  the 
negation  of  civilization,  which  for  six  or  seven  centuries  after  the  lapse  of 
old  Rome  continually  seemed  about  to  begin? — Secretan. 

2  WTest  Francia  was  France,  East  Francia  Germany.  They  had  been 
tending  apart  ever  since  the  treaty  of  Verdun,  843.  Only  for  the  years 
884-' 7  Charles  the  Fat.  son  of  Louis  the  German,  grandson  of  Louis  the 
Pious  and  great-grandson  of  Karl  Great,  united  all  the  old  Frankish 
empire  under  his  rule.  The  Diet  of  Tribur,  887,  deposed  him  as 
faineant.  The  midland  between  the  central  part  of  the  Lotharingia 
laid  out  at  Verdun,  nearly  coinciding  with  the  Elsass-Lothringen  of  to- 
day, has  been  an  object  of  contention  between  France  and  Germany  ever 
since.  Elsass-Lothringen  forms  now  a  single  '  Reichsland]  not  Reichs- 
lande  [still  less  Reichslander,  as  Bryce  writes — bad  German  as  well  as 
mistaken  political  geography]. 

8  I.e.,  during  the  times  of  Popes  Sergius  and  John  X,  when  the  pros- 
titutes Theodora  and  her  two  daughters,  Theodora  and  Marozia,  disposed  of 
the  papal  cap  [not  tiara  till  1048]  as  they  listed.  —  Milman,  vol  Hi,  158  sqq. 


§  8     The  Empire  and  the  German  Kingdom 

Bryce,  viii,  xii ;  ibid.  452  sqq.     Schulte,  201  sqq.      Waitz,  III,  221  sqq. 

Through  precedent  coupled  with  the  prestige  and 
power  of  German  kings,  not  otherwise,  the  Roman  em- 
pire from  the  imperial  coronation  of  Otho  the  Great,  962, 
became  attached  to,  almost  identified  with,  the  German 
kingdom.  The  kings  as  such  came  to  be  styled  kings 
of  the  Romans,  the  empire  a  German  empire,1  the  latter 
the  more  naturally  as  the  empire  remained  longest  effi- 
cient in  Germany.  That  the  emperor  should  be  a  Ger- 
man king  was  from  this  date  thought  constitutionally 
necessary,2  though  several  earlier  emperors  had  lacked 
this  character.     The  relation  between  empire  and  king- 


I48         THE  MEDLEVAL  ROMAN  EMPIRE 

dom  was  never  exactly  determined,  for  many  centu- 
ries scarcely  considered.  Imperial  sovereignty  and  the 
king's  feudal  sovereignty,  so  different  in  nature,  hence 
reacted  upon  and  greatly  modified  each  other,  producing 
among  others  these  weighty  consequences  :  1  The  Ro- 
man law  became  law  for  the  German  land.  2  The  em- 
pire remained  elective.  The  rise  of  the  electoral  college 
is  obscure.  The  earliest  German  kings  were,  we  have 
seen,  chosen  in  popular  assembly.  By  degrees  the 
number  fell  off,  only  the  foremost  imperial  vassals  at 
length  remaining.  The  Golden  Bull3  of  Emperor 
Charles  IV,  1356,  limited  membership  in  the  college  to 
the  Archbishops  of  Mayence,  Treves  and  Cologne,4  with 
the  Duke  of  Saxony,  Margrave  of  Brandenburg,  King  of 
Bohemia  and  Count  Palatine  of  the  Rhine.5  3  The  Ger- 
man king,  often  absent,  always  distracted  with  imperial 
cares,  gradually  became  unable  to  assert  himself  as 
king.  His  subalterns,  as  princes,  dukes,  electors,  some 
of  them  at  length  as  kings,  waxed  independent,  while 
his  royal  office  waned  to  a  shadow.  The  same  suffered 
also  from  the  humiliation  of  the  imperial  power  by  the 
popes. 

1  But  this  was  never  its  proper  title.  Strictly  it  was  the  Roman  or 
Holy  Roman  Empire.  Although  Francis  II,  in  abdicating  its  throne, 
called  the  old  empire  the  German  Empire,  strictly  there  was  never  a 
'German  Empire'  or  a  'German  Emperor  '  till  1871.  Now  both  exist. 
Coins  of  Frederic  I  [e.g.]  bear  the  legend,  Frederic  dei  Gra  Romanor. 
Impertor  Augs. 

2  Apostolica  sedes  ilium  in  imperatorem  debeat  coronare  qui  rite 
fuerit  coronatus  in  regent,  wrote  Innocent  III.  But  one  could  be  chosen 
king,  and  so  emperor,  who  was  not  a  German,  as  Richard,  Earl  of  Corn- 
wall, and  Alphonso  of  Castile  [§  20,  n.  3]. 

8  An  edict,  called  '  bull '  from  the  bulla  or  seal  upon  it,  composed  in 
this  case  of  gold. 


OF    THE    WEST  I49 

*  In  German,  Mainz,  Trier  and  Koln.  These  prelates  were  imperial 
chancellors  for  Germany,  Burgundy  and  Italy  respectively.  The  bull  made 
the  first  the  convener  of  the  college  and  Frankfort  instead  of  Aix-la- 
Chapelle  [Aachen]  the  place  of  meeting,  which  it  remained  henceforth. 
Duruy,  507  sqq.,  has  a  fine  brief  account  of  this  bull. 

6  Saxony  also  held  the  honorary  office  of  Marshal,  Brandenburg  that  of 
Chamberlain,  Bohemia  that  of  Cup-bearer,  the  Palatinate  that  of  Seneschal. 
The  college  in  its  oldest  form  had  the  mere  right  of  praetaxation  or 
official  nomination  On  this,  Bryce,  229  sqq.;  Harnack,  d.  Kurfiirsttn- 
koll.  bis  zur  Mitte  d.  xiv  Jahrh.,  and  Quidde,  Entstehung  d.  Kta-fiirsten- 
kollegiums.  By  this  bull  the  duke  and  the  count  were  to  be  regents  in 
case  of  interregnum.  The  Palatinate  lost  its  electorship  by  its  revolt  from 
the  emperor  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War  [Ch.  IX],  the  honor  passing  to 
Bavaria.  The  peace  of  Westphalia  renewed  it  for  the  Palatinate,  thus 
increasing  the  number  of  electors  to  eight.  In  1692  the  Duke  of  Hannover 
was  made  a  ninth  elector.  The  number  fell  to  eight  again  in  1777,  when, 
by  the  extinction  of  the  Bavarian  line,  the  Palatine  countship  and  the 
dukeship  of  Bavaria  became  again  united  in  one  man  as  they  had  been 
under  Ludwig  I  and  Otho  II,  the  Illustrious,  of  the  great  Wittelsbach 
house.  Otho  I,  von  Wittelsbach,  was  invested  with  the  duchy  of  Bavaria 
in  1 183  by  Frederic  Barbarossa,  when  it  escheated  to  the  empire  through 
the  treason  of  Henry  the  Lion.  Ludwig  I,  son,  succeeded  Otho  I  in 
Bavaria  in  1231,  having  already  possessed  the  Palatinate  since  1214,  when 
he  received  it  from  Emperor  Frederic  II.  Otho  the  Illustrious,  dying  in 
1253,  left  the  Palatinate,  with  the  electorship,  to  his  elder  son,  Ludwig 
the  Severe,  [Lower]  Bavaria  to  his  younger,  Henry.  From  this  time  till 
the  Diet  of  Regensburg,  1623,  no  electorate  attaches  to  Bavaria.  —  Weber, 
Weltgesch.,  I,  833. 

§  9    The  Extent  of  the  Empire 

Bryce,  ch.  xii,  and  Appendix  C.     Schulte,  Anhang\. 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  empire  had,  at  any  given  time, 
different  degrees,  and  each  of  these  varied  with  periods. 
The  great  emperors  like  their  Roman  predecessors,  em- 
phasizing theory  but  falsifying  fact,  called  themselves 
lords  of  the  world.1  Parts  of  Frisia  [Holland]  and  Switz- 
erland, nominally  in  the  empire,  were  always  as  good 


I50  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

as  independent.  Otho  the  Great  lost  Neustria,  gained 
by  conquests  to  the  north  alid  east.  The  emperor  was 
efficient  sovereign  only  in  Germany,  which,  however, 
included  Elsass-Lothringen  and  part  of  Flanders.  Bur- 
gundy, though  an  imperial  land,2  was  much  more  inde- 
pendent. After  Frederic  Barbarossa,  owing  to  the 
growth  of  vassals'  power,  some  portion  of  Germany 
itself  was  nearly  always  in  revolt.  Lower  Italy  held 
to  the  East  till  the  Norman  Conquest,3  ioi6-'57.  After 
this  though  claimed  by  the  empire  it  never  properly 
forms  part  thereof.  The  kingdom  of  Lombardy,  over 
which  he  was  in  theory  king  as  well  as  emperor,  obeyed 
the  emperor  only  as  compelled,  which,  through  the 
strength  of  its  cities  and  the  support  of  the  popes,  it 
could  rarely  be.4  Besides  the  lands  mentioned,  there 
were :  1  Vassal  principalities  outside  the  German  king- 
dom, as  Denmark,  Hungary  and  Poland,  acknowledging 
the  emperor's  sovereignty  over  them  and,  save  when 
judging  it  safe  to  refuse,  furnishing  troops  and  tribute. 
2  Principalities  strictly  sovereign  and  independent,  as 
Spain  and  England,  recognizing  the  emperor's  superi- 
ority, yet  only  in  comity.  That  such  were  regarded  as 
in  some  sense  members  of  the  empire  is  shown  by  the 
occasional  election  of  emperors  from  them.5  3  Princi- 
palities such  as  Iceland,  Lithuania,  Venice  and  the 
eastern  empire  which  declined  even  this.  France  may 
be  said  to  have  passed  on  the  death  of  Otho  I,6  from  the 
first  of  these  classes  to  the  second,  as  did,  later,  the 
states  into  which  Germany  itself  broke  up.7 

1  Karl  Great  spoke  of  himself  as  •  ruling  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth,' 
Frederic  I  of  himself  as  '  lord  of  the  world.'  The  Emperor  Sigismund  on 
his  death-bed  gave  command  that  his  body  should  lie  some  days  in  state 


OF    THE    WEST  1 5  I 

'to  assure  all  men  that  the  lord  of  the  whole  world  was  dead.'  The  elec- 
tors told  Frederic  III :  '  We  have  chosen  your  grace  as  head  protector  and 
governor  of  all  Christendom.' 

2  Bryce,  455.  Notice  that  the  kingship  of  Italy  or  Lombardy  was  as 
different  as  possible  from  the  imperatorship,  and  that  '  King  of  the 
Romans,'  first  applied  by  Henry  III  to  his  son,  Henry  IV,  meant  simply 
1  King  Elect,'  being  a  title  analogous  to  '  Prince  of  Wales,'  or  '  Prince  of 
Asturias,'  except  dependence  on  election.  A  '  king  of  the  Romans '  on 
his  predecessor's  decease  immediately  succeeded  to  the  German  throne 
without  new  election  or  coronation.  To  avoid  the  journey  to  Rome  to 
receive  the  imperial  crown  Maximilian  I,  1493-15 19,  obtained  the  pope's 
permission  to  use  still  another  title,  that  of '  Emperor  Elect,'  so  as  to  begin 
functioning  as  emperor  at  once  upon  succeeding  to  kingship.  Ferdinand  I, 
i556-'64,  and  his  successors  assumed  this  style  as  of  right,  no  emperor  after 
Frederic  III,  i440-'93,  ever  being  crowned  at  Rome,  though  Charles  V, 
1519— '56,  was  crowned  emperor  at  Bologna. 

3  For  the  conquest  of  southern  Italy  by  the  Normans  and  the  manner 
of  its  subjection  to  the  pope,  Duruy,  262  sqq.;  Raumer,  Hohenstaufen,  I, 
Beilage  i;  Weber,  IVeltgesch.,  I,  609  sqq.;  Palomes,  Storia  de  li  Nor- 
manni  in  Sicilia  [Palermo,  1883];  Delarc,  Les  Normands  en  Italic 
1883].     On  its  relation  to  the  empire,  §§  19,  20. 

4  See  §§  1 7-20. 

6  See  last  §,  n.  2;   Bryce,  143. 

6  This  Otho,  the  Great,  was  the  last  emperor  to  whom  France  ever 
acknowledged  allegiance. 

7  The  parallel  between  these  and  France  is  not  perfect,  in  that  they, 
although  at  length  in  effect  sovereign,  always  acknowledged  a  species  of 
subordination  to  the  empire,  which  France  did  not. 

§  10    The  Dukes 

Schulte,  185  sqq,  144-287.     Secretan,  Feodaliti,  144  sqq. 

The  rise  of  subordinate  states,  threatening  and  finally 
annulling  the  consequence  of  the  empire,  due  partly  to 
dukes'  exercise  of  patronage,  partly  to  their  wealth, 
partly  to  royal  favor,  begins  with  the  re-exaltation  of 
the  ducal  office,1  soon  after  Karl  the  Great's  death.  In 
Germany  the  new  duchies  assume  a  quasi-national  char- 


152  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

acter,  including  and  dominating  each  its  group  of  coun- 
ties. Properly  and  usually,  jurisdictio  2  did  not  belong 
to  dukes  as  dukes  but  to  the  counts,  whc,  in  their  char- 
acter as  judges,  held  directly  from  the  king.  Yet  a 
duke  would  often  have  '  rights  of  count  over  several 
of  his  counties.  Till  Frederic  I,  Barbarossa,  1152-90, 
there  are  nine  regular  duchies,  of  which  Saxony,  Bava- 
ria, Swabia,  Franconia  and  Lotharingia,  the  most  im- 
portant, betray  in  many  respects  the  marks  of  separate 
states.  Dukes  (1)  succeed  to  the  functions  of  missi 
dominici  yet  without  being  at  any  time  mere  officers, 
(2)  become  hereditary,  (3)  appear  as  incipient  kings,, 
ruling  'by  God's  grace,'3  commanding  uic  Heerbann, 
collecting  royal  revenues,  holding  highest  courts,  also 
diets  which  all  the  inferior  dignitaries  attend.  Mar- 
graves, counts  palatine  and  simple  counts  also  became 
hereditary,  and  after  the  second  reduction  of  the  ducal 
power  under  the  Hohenstaufen,  more  and  more  inde- 
pendent.4 The  other  Fiirsten :  the  landgraves,  Fnihcr- 
ren>  archbishops,  bishops  and  prince-abbots,  followed  the 
same  upward  course.  All  came  in  time  to  possess 
county,  ducal  and  regalian  5  rights  and  the  right  of  hav- 
ing lords  as  their  vassals.  Old  exemptions 6  relating 
to  their  territories  were  removed,  new  ones  forbidden, 
supreme  jurisdiction  allowed  them,  dwellers  upon  their 
territory  as  such,  made  their  subjects. 

1  Duruy,  214  sq.,  also  §  3,  above,  and  Sickel,  IVesett  d.  Volksherzog- 
thums,  in  v.  Sybel's  Zeitschrift,  1884,  Heft  6. 

2  Here  used  in  the  technical  sense  of  the  Roman  law,  meaning  the 
right  to  deliver  formal  judicial  sentences. 

8  This  was  then,  as  it  is  now,  the  usual  phrase  to  denote  sovereignty. 
When  the  Fiirsten  [n.  3]  were  confessed  to  be  rulers  '  by  God's  grace,'  the 
empire  had  become  a  mere  presidency  over  sovereign  states,  which  in  all 


OF   THE   WEST  153 

its  later  years  it  was.  Some  assumed  this  style  before  others,  those,  i.e., 
farthest  from  the  royal  seat  and  power. 

4  A  Fiirst  was  any  vassal  holding  his  estates,  with  right  of  Heerbann 
and  of  count,  immediately  from  the  emperor.  In  Latin  he  was  named 
princeps,  in  French,  prince,  yet  neither  word  has  the  definiteness  of 
•  Fiirst?  since  both,  like  our  word  'prince?  answer  to  the  German  'Prinz,' 
as  well  as  to  Fiirst.  So  'Fiirst  Bismarck?  but  '  the  Kronprinz.'  Weaken- 
ing of  the  dukes  gave  the  inferior  Fursten  all  the  freer  scope  to  rise,  and 
some  of  these  became  quite  as  hostile  to  the  central  power  as  the  great 
dukes  had  been.     On  the  humiliation  of  the  dukes,  see  §  18. 

6  I.e.,  royal  rights,  chief  among  which  were  coining  money  and  levy- 
ing tolls. 

6  Estates  within  duchies,  margraviats,  or  count-districts,  which  had 
been  given  in  fief  to  favorites  of  the  emperor  and  made  independent  of 
the  surrounding  jurisdiction.  Some  of  these  were  secular,  others  ecclesias- 
tical. Sometimes  a  princeling  of  this  sort  would  be  subject  to  duke  but 
independent  of  count.  The  Franconian  emperors  made  such  exemptions, 
especially  the  ecclesiastical,  systematically,  to  weaken  their  great  feuda- 
tories. —  Duruy,  272. 

§   11     The  Counts 

Same  auth.  as  at  last  §. 

'  Count '  or  '  Graf '  was  originally  a  generic  name  for 
royal  office.  Karl  the  Great  had  counts  palatine,  counts 
of  marches,  travelling  counts.1  By  a  more  special,  also 
early,  application  already  noticed,2  the  word  signified 
the  head  of  a  district  or  canton,3  an  officer  charged 
primarily  with  jurisdiction  but  also  with  military  com- 
mand. In  the  long  evolution  of  the  office,  especially  in 
the  dissipation  through  exemptions  ecclesiastical  and 
other,  of  the  cantonal  system  of  administration,  varie- 
ties of  counts  became  still  more  numerous.  The  change 
exalted  some  of  them  but  depressed  the  most.  The 
palatinate  was  in  nearly  all  cases  lost  in  other  dignities, 
although  the  Count  Palatine  of  the  Rhine  became  the 
first  lay  dignitary  in  the  empire  and  an  imperial  vicar.4 


154  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

Margraves  maintained  their  early  rank,  about  ducal, 
those  of  Austria  and  Brandenburg  even  surpassed  the 
ducal  rank.  Landgraves  were  counts  in  the  interior  of 
the  empire,  with  the  same  rank  as  margraves  but  less 
power.  A  few  other  counts  extended  their  jurisdiction 
over  several  counties.  Among  counts  of  the  lower  or- 
der, such  as  the  vassals  of  dukes,  of  ecclesiastical  Fiirsten 
or  of  the  higher  counts,  were  burggraves,5  ruling  towns 
and  fortified  chdteaux,  with  jurisdiction  direct  from  the 
emperor  but  subject  in  military,  things  to  duke,  mar- 
grave or  other  immediate  lord.  The  ecclesiastical  Fiir- 
sten referred  to  were  archbishops,  bishops  and  high 
abbots. 

1  Pfalzgrafen,  Markgrafen,  Sendgrafen.  8  In  German,  '  Gau.' 

2  At  Ch.  IV,  §  15,  n.  2.  *  See  §  8,  n.  4. 

6  The  Hohenzollern  were  once  mere  burggraves  of  Nuremberg.  Cf. 
§  17,  n.  4.     Secretan  connects  'Graf  with  'greifen.' 

§   12     Empire  and  Church 

Bryce,  ch.  x.    Milman,  bk.  vii.     Gregorovius,  vol.  vi,  20  sqq.     Prutz,  III. 

The  centuries  next  succeeding  Karl  the  Great  de- 
veloped two  radically  antagonistic  theories  concerning 
the  nature  of  the  empire.  The  state-church  theory 
though  already  centuries  old  we  find  most  formally  set 
forth  in  Dante's  De  Monarchia.  Dante  seeks  to  prove 
that  (1)  rule  over  the  world  belongs  of  right  to  the  Ro- 
man people  and  through  them  to  the  emperor,1  (2)  such 
an  empire  is  indispensable  to  the  weal  of  human  society, 
(3)  the  emperor's  authority  is  directly  from  God,  not 
from  or  through  the  pope.  According  to  this  concep- 
tion, borrowed  from  the  idea  of  the  church,  as  this  had 
been  from  the  original  notion  of  Rome's  rulership  and 


OF    THE   WEST  I  55 

office  on  earth,  the  empire  was  the  one  indispensable, 
responsible  mediator  of  humanity's  corporate  interests, 
itself  a  revelation  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  the  church  being 
simply  the  empire's  organ  for  the  empire's  own  moral 
and  spiritual  work.2  It  was  conceived  as  incapable  of 
cessation,  as  unbroken  from  Augustus  and  as  thus  ante- 
rior and  superior  to  Christianity,  which  it  had  taken  up 
into  itself.  Many  great  minds,  especially  after,  in  the 
twelfth  century,  the  study  of  Roman  law  was  renewed, 
passionately  espoused  this  view,  nowise  staggering  at 
the  palpable  failure  of  both  emperors  and  empire  to  con- 
form to  the  ideal.  The  papal  or  church-state  theory, 
originating  in  Augustine's  City  of  God,3  mightily  fur- 
thered by  the  false-Isidorian  decretals  and  slowly  work- 
ing its  way  first  to  the  consciousness  of  the  church,  then 
into  the  formulae  of  canon  law,  was  in  principle  exactly 
the  reverse  of  the  above.  It  made  the  church  supreme, 
God's  sole  institute  and  agent  for  working  human  wel- 
fare, the  state  only  its  functionary.  It  nowise  set  the 
state  aside  :  so  long  as  docile,  exalted  it  rather.  Yet  in 
practice  the  empire  could  not  but  be  degraded  by  its 
prevalence.  Civil  power  was  denounced  as  worldly, 
originating  in  sin,  no  more  comparable  with  spiritual 
than  body  with  soul. 

1  He  explictly  makes  the  whole  earth  the  emperor's  realm  and  every 
mortal  his  subject,  denominating  Henry  VII  rex  mundi  as  well  as  minister 
lei.  This  strange  treatise  adduces  arguments  promiscuously  from  Homer, 
Aristotle,  Juvenal,  Ovid,  Lucan,  and  the  Psalms.  The  author  evidently 
regards  it  a  telling  point  when  he  notices  that  scripture  denominates  as 
'  the  fulness  of  times '  the  epoch  of  our  Lord's  advent,  i.e.,  the  period  im- 
mediately succeeding  the  accession  of  Augustus  and  the  establishment  of 
the  empire.  Book  II  begins:  '  Why  do  the  heathen  rage?'  [Ps.  II]  as 
applicable  to  the  Guelphs.     Book  III  contains  a  refutation  of  the  sun- 


156  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

moon  analogy  [n.  3,  below]  in  the  observation  that  the  moon  is  visible 
even  in  an  eclipse  of  the  sun.  Observe  that  the  state-church  arrangement 
involves  much  more  than  the  mere  support  of  a  given  form  of  religion  by 
the  state,  as  in  England  to-day. 

2  It  was  thus  a  'holy  empire,'  an  edict  of  Henry  VII  commanding  as  a 
•  divine  precept '  that '  every  soul  be  subject  to  the  Roman  sovereign,'  on 
whose  sway  '  the  order  of  the  whole  world  reposes.' 

8  Ch.  Ill,  §  15,  n.  5.  This  theory  is  best  set  forth  by  Thomas  Aquinas. 
On  the  decrettls,  §  4,  n.  6.  Innocent  III  wrote :  '  The  Creator  has  fixed 
in  the  firmament  of  the  Church  universal  two  dignities.  The  greater,  the 
papacy,  governs  souls  as  the  sun  by  day.  The  less,  the  empire,  governs 
bodies  as  the  moon  by  night'  He  locates  both  in  the  Church.  The 
great  question  was,  as  Duruy  puts  it,  ■  who,  the  heir  of  St.  Peter  or  the 
heir  of  Augustus  and  Charlemagne,  shall  remain  master  of  the  world  ? ' 

§   13     Gregory  Hildebrand 

Milman,  bk.  vii.  Giesebrecht,  bks.  vi,  vii.  Prutz,  III.  Smith,  Church  dg.  Mid. 
Ages,  vol.  ii.  Btrwden,  Life  of  Gregory  VII.  Ranke,  Weltgesch.,  VII.  Lea,  Sac- 
erdotal Celibacy.  Ceffcken,  Church  and  State,  i.  Ibach,  Kampf zwischen  Papst- 
tiiinii  u.  Konigthum,  etc.  [1884].      Villemain  and  Gf rarer  as  in  bibliog. 

Decisive  clash  between  these  two  theories,  both  so 
exalting  unity,  the  principle  for  which  the  middle  age 
had  a  passion,  was  inevitable.  The  papal  was  first  con- 
ceived in  its  full  reach  and  majesty  by  Hildebrand,1 
whom  events  conspired  with  his  own  matchless  will, 
skill  and  daring,  to  aid  in  realizing  it.  History  shows 
no  more  astounding  transition  than  the  upward  leap  of 
papal  power  at  the  death  of  Henry  III,  a  movement  of 
which  Hildebrand  was  soul.  In  his  favor  were  (i)  his 
long  relation  to  the  papacy,  covering  several  pontificates 
before  his  own,2  (2)  the  new  purity,  dignity  and  power 
brought  to  the  papacy  by  German  popes  under  Henry 
III,3  (3)  Henry  IV's  youth  and  vices,  (4)  the  insubordi- 
nation of  Henry's  Saxon  subjects,4  (5)  Italian  hatred 
of  the  empire,  longing  and  brave  effort  for  freedom, 


OP    THE    WEST  157 

(6)  papal  alliance  with  the  Norman  and  Tuscan  princi- 
palities.5 Tuscany  especially,  was  an  indispensable  aid. 
Hildebrand's  central  purpose,  as  shown  by  the  order 
of  events  in  the  struggle,6  was  not  to  exalt  the  papacy 
but  to  reform  the  clergy.  Worldliness,  concubinage, 
simony,  was  universal.  Henry's  mistresses  wore  jewels 
from  the  church's  caskets.  Each  valuable  church  dig- 
nity was  sold  to  the  highest  bidder.  Benedict  IX7 
bartered  the  papal  office  itself.  Leo  IX  found  that 
thorough  reform  at  once  would  leave  Rome  without  a 
priest.  As  indispensable  to  the  needed  radical  change, 
Hildebrand  resolved  to  make  the  entire  clergy  responsi- 
ble in  all  respects  to  an  independent  pope,  totally  abol- 
ishing the  lay  investiture  of  clerks.8  In  withstanding 
this,  Henry  was  supported  by  an  anti-reform  party 
among  the  clergy  throughout  Europe,  also  by  most  of 
the  powerful  nobles  of  Rome  and  Lombardy.  The 
same  great  Roman  families9  who  had  cursed  Henry  III 
allied  themselves  ardently  with  his  son  to  annihilate 
Hildebrand. 

1  Hildebrand  was  a  carpenter's  son.  Gregorovius,  judging  by  the 
name,  thinks  him  to  have  been  of  Lombard  [Teutonic]  stock.  We  have 
the  autographs  '  Yldibrandus '  and  '  Heldebr audits,'  as  well  as  the  con- 
temporary spellings  '  Ildebrandas '  and  '  Oldeprandus?  H.'s  pontificate 
extended  from  April  22,  1073  to  May  25,  1085. 

2  He  was  chaplain  to  Gregory  VI,  I045~'6,  went  to  Germany  with 
Clement  II,  '46-'8,  and  came  back  to  Rome  with  Leo  IX,  '48-'54.  Under 
Stephen  IX,  '57— '8,  he  was  Archdeacon.  He  had  been  Chancellor  or  Sec- 
retary of  State  to  five  different  popes.     Cf.  Neander,  III,  380  sqq. 

3  Although  the  reforming  popes  hitherto  had  come  from  Germany,  the 
Abbey  of  Cluny  [Clugni]  in  France  was  now  the  centre  of  the  reform  party 
in  the  church.  Hildebrand  had  been  educated  there,  and  from  there 
came,  after  him,  Popes  Urban  II,  io87-'99,  inspirer  of  the  First  Crusade, 
and  Paschal  II,  1099-1118. 


I58  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

4  This  is  discussed  by  Bruno,  de  hello  Saxonico  [n.  6,  below]. 

5  The  popes  had  held  the  suzerainty  over  Norman  Italy  since  Leo  IX, 
l048-'54,  to  whom,  after  having  conquered  him  in  arms,  they  yet  surren- 
dered as  vassals  [§  9,  n.  3].  Beatrice,  heiress  of  Tuscany,  herself  a  devoted 
papist,  married  for  second  husband  Godfrey  of  Lothringen  [Lorraine],  who 
was  a  rebel  against  imperial  authority  and  hence  a  natural  ally  of  Gregory. 
Godfrey's  son  married  Mathilda,  Beatrice's  daughter,  perpetuating  the 
friendliness  of  Tuscany  to  the  holy  see.  Mathilda  willed  thereto  her 
entire  lands,  amounting  to  a  quarter  of  Italy.  It  was  partly  a  fief  of  the 
empire,  partly  allodial  [Ch.  VI,  §  4,  n.  5]. 

6  He  attacks  clerical  vices  first  [§  15].  Had  he  wished  power  he 
would  have  cemented  the  clergy  to  himself  before  assailing  Henry.  On 
this  controversy  of  so  thrilling  interest  the  chief  original  sources  are :  For 
Henry,  against  Gregory:  Benno  [cardinal],  Vita  Hildebrandi  [bitter 
and  indecent];  Benzo  [bishop  of  Alba],  Panegyricus  in  Imp.  Henri  aim 
IV;  Waltram  [bp.  of  Naumburg],  liber  de  unitate  ecclesiae  conservanda  ; 
Sigebert  of  Gembloux,  Ckronicon,  and  other  writings  ;  Epistola  cujus- 
dam,  by  an  unknown  writer,  upon  Gregory's  too  severe  procedure  against 
married  priests;  Vita  Henrici  IV  [of  unknown  authorship].  For 
Gregory,  against  Henry  :  Bruno,  de  bello  Saxonico  [the  most  passion- 
ate of  all] ;  Bernold,  Chronicon ;  Bardo,  Vita  Anselmi  [Anselm  was 
bishop  of  Lucca,  nephew  and  successor  of  Alexander  II,  and  one  of  Grego- 
ry's intimates.  Bardo  incorporates  much  from  Anselm's  own  pen] ;  Placi- 
dus  [prior  of  Nonantola],  Liber  de  honor e  ecclesiae  ;  Bonizo  [bp.  of  Sutri], 
Liber  ad  amicum.  [For  a  fuller  notice,  see  Wattenbach,  II,  167  sqq.; 
also  Giesebrecht,  III  and  IV.  Bruno  and  the  Vita  Henrici  exist  in 
Pertz's  hand-edition,  very  cheap  and  convenient.  Nearly  all  are  in  his 
Monumenta.     Cf.  in  Rev.  d.  d.  Alondes,  Ap.  &  Mai,  1873.] 

7  On  this  base  pope,  '  more  childish  than  Caligula,  as  wicked  as  Elaga- 
balus,'  Milman,  vol.  iii,  229  sqq.,  Gregorovius,  IV,  75  sqq. 

8  That  is,  the  investiture  of  the  bishops,  archbishops  and  abbots  of  the 
empire,  even  with  the  ring  and  staff,  those  symbols  of  spiritual  office,  was 
till  Hildebrand  the  act  of  the  emperor,  a  layman. 

9  These  aristocrats  with  the  cities  in  the  north  had  made  the  strength 
of  the  Guelph  party  in  Italy  [§  17].  Out  of  hatred  to  Hildebrand  they 
now  turn  Ghibelline.  A  few  Roman  nobles,  however,  favor  the  pope. 
Had  clerical  marriage  or  concubinage  been  permitted,  church  offices 
would  have  become  hereditary  in  these  and  such  families,  and  feudalism 
would  have  cursed  the  church  as  it  did  civil  life.  Not  likely  that  Gregory 
or  any  of  the  popes  who  aided  the  cities  were  animated  by  zeal  fo/ 
freedom  or  for  a  united  Italy. 


of  the  west  159 

§  14    The  Church  and  Feudalism 

Hallam,  ch.  vii,  pt.  i.     Schulte,  125  sqq.,  188.    Milman,  vol.  ii,  484  sqq.    Nittsch, 
bd.  ii,  16-58. 

The  eleventh  century  saw  church  and  clergy  like  the 
rest  of  society,  in  the  toils  of  the  feudal  system.  One- 
fifth  of  France,  one-third  of  Germany  was  ecclesiastical 
land,  ruled,  subject  to  the  monarch  alone,  by  arch- 
bishops, bishops  and  abbots,  who  had  become  invested 
with  rights  of  duke  and  of  count,  and  exercised  these  as 
suzerains  over  the  entire  population  of  their  domains. 
In  their  secular  character  these  church  officials  were 
usually  represented  by  lay  advocates,  who  bore  to  them 
the  relation  sometimes  of  patrons,  more  sometimes  of 
regular  vassals.1  The  emperor  himself  was  patron  of 
numberless  abbeys,  as  he  was  suzerain  of  all  arch- 
bishops and  bishops,  whom  he  invested  not  only  with 
ring  and  staff  but  as  his  liege  men  in  the  ordinary  tem- 
poral fashion.  Controlling  their  religious  influence 
among  the  people  through  their  temporal  dependence 
on  him,  he  used  the  bishops  as  his  chief  support  against 
insubordinate  dukes.  Apart  from  this,  such  was  then 
the  lack  of  clear  distinction  between  spiritual  and  tem- 
poral authority  and  between  feudal  and  proper  political 
sovereignty,  that  the  execution  of  Gregory's  programme 
must  have  threatened  the  very  existence  of  civil  society. 
It  would  have  erected  innumerable  scattered  fragments 
taken  from  all  the  European  states  into  a  single  ecclesi- 
astical state  subject  to  Rome.2 

1  Many  were  vassals  in  form,  patrons  in  fact,  much  the  relation 
now  held  by  Austria  to  Turkey  in  respect  to  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina. 
See  Happ,  De   advocatia   ccchsiastica  [Bonn,  1870].      A   fief  could   be 


l60  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

accepted  from  an  ecclesiastic  without  disgrace  by  a  powerful  count  or 
duke  who  would  have  disdained  the  same  from  his  lay  neighbor.  The 
four  great  honorary  officers  of  the  emperor:  marshal,  seneschal,  etc.,  filled 
corresponding  posts  in  the  chapter  of  the  bishop  of  Bamberg.  The  prince- 
Abbey  of  Fulda  had  as  its  vassals  the  Archduke  of  Austria,  the  Dukes  of 
Bavaria  and  Saxony,  the  Landgraves  of  Thuringia  and  Hesse,  with  a 
crowd  of  counts  and  several  imperial  cities,  as  Frankfort  and  Muhlhausen. 
The  emperor  even,  held  the  seigniory  of  Wimpfen  as  a  fief  of  the  diocese 
of  Worms.  —  Secretan. 

2  Milman,  bk.  vii,  chaps,  i,  iii. 


§  15     To  Canossa 

Milman,  VII,  ii.     Prutz,  III.     Hefele,  in   Tubitiger  Quartalschr.,  1861.    Lea  [in 
Studies],  '  Excommunication.'     Raumer,  bk.  ii.    Nitzsck,  bd.  ii,  59-112. 

Hildebrand,  the  greatest  mind  and  shrewdest  politi- 
cian of  his  age,  proceeded  with  combined  boldness  and 
skill.  Laws  already  existing  against  the  great  clerical 
vices  he  enforced  with  unprecedented  rigor,  incurring 
hostility  in  a  way  and  to  a  degree  speaking  for  the 
purity  of  his  aim.  His  first  revolutionary  act  was  the 
emancipation  of  papal  elections.1  The  emperors,  es- 
pecially Henry  III,  had  insisted  on  having  decisive 
voice  in  these.  An  adroitly  worded  decree2  of  Nicholas 
II,  1059,  made  a  college  of  cardinals  plenipotentiary  for 
this  business,  the  emperor  to  have  the  right  even  of 
confirmation  only  as  a  personal  concession.  Further 
fine  diplomacy  coupled  with  good  fortune,  procured  the 
election  and  confirmation,  under  this  new  law,  of  Alex- 
ander II  as  pope.  The  bitter  strife  over  this  election3 
seems  to  have  decided  Hildebrand.  Himself  elected 
pope  and  securely  confirmed,  he  issues  the  renowned 
decree  of  1075,  abrogating  lay  investiture.  Even  after 
this  for  a  time,  king  is  submissive,  pope  gracious.    Soon 


OF    THE   WEST  l6l 

the  mood  of  both  changes,  and  Hildebrand  summons 
Henry,  guilty  among  much  else  of  sheltering  deposed 
bishops,  to  Rome  to  answer  for  his  sins.  To  the  king's 
idle  pretence  of  deposing  him  4  Hildebrand  replies  with 
a  bull  excommunicating  Henry  and  placing  his  kingdom 
under  interdict.  The  king  was  doomed.  Staunchest 
friends  deserted  him  with  loathing.  The  Diet  of  Tribur, 
October,  1076,  legislating  for  the  realm,  reduced  him  to 
the  estate  of  a  private  man  and  resolved  to  elect  a  new 
king  if  the  next  February  25th  found  Henry  unabsolved. 
Crossing  the  Alps  at  the  risk  of  his  life  and  hastening 
to  Canossa  the  lord  of  the  empire  prostrates  himself  an 
abject  penitent  before  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  who  at  last 
deigns  to  grant  him  absolution.5 

1  On  the  mode,  original  and  modern,  of  electing  pope,  Fisher,  Discus- 
sions, 141  sqq.  The  pope,  as  bishop  of  the  Roman  church,  which  he  still 
remains,  was  like  all  bishops  for  centuries  elected  popularly.  Karl,  Otho 
and  all  the  really  powerful  emperors  interfered  more  or  less  with  this  free 
Roman  election,  confidently  naming  candidates  as  they  did  for  ordinary 
bishoprics.  The  cardinals,  who  still  remain  as  by  the  decree  of  1059,  the 
electors,  are  the  presbyters  and  deacons  of  the  Roman  church  with  the 
bishops  of  the  suburban  churches  offshoots  of  the  Roman.  All,  wherever 
resident,  are  thus  officials  of  that  church.  The  full  college  numbers  70 : 
viz.  6  bishops,  50  priests,  14  deacons.  The  pope  appoints  them.  So  far 
as  he  is  a  temporal  sovereign  they  are  temporal  princes,  yet  their  office  is 
mainly  ecclesiastical,  and  involves  vast  fields  of  church  administration 
aside  from  electing  pope.  In  this  their  most  solemn  function  they  are  to 
give  the  preference  to  candidates  from  the  Roman  church  itself.  Cardi- 
nals did  not  at  first  wear  purple,  nor  did  the  custom  of  shutting  them  up 
in  conclave  to  elect  the  pope  arise  till  Gregory  X,  I2']i-'j6. 

2  The  cardinal  bishops  were  to  have  the  initiative,  but  must  secure  the 
consent  of  the  cardinal  priests  and  deacons.  '  Applause '  was  expected 
from  the  laity  as  of  course,  and  the  election  was  to  '  save  the  honor  and 
reverence  due  to  Henry,  now  king,  future  emperor.'  Under  this  rule 
Hildebrand's  own  election  was  confirmed  by  Henry  IV  himself,  but  it  was 
the  last  intervention  of  the  kind  that  ever  occurred.  See  Gregorovius,  voL 
iv.  112  sqq. 


l62        THE  MEDIEVAL  ROMAN  EMPIRE 

*  Some  German  and  Lombard  prelates  who  favored  clerical  marriage 
[nearly  every  clergyman  in  the  Milan  diocese  did]  assembled  in  Basle, 
annulled  Alexander's  election  after  it  had  occurred,  and  chose  Cadalous, 
bishop  of  Parma,  as  Honorius  II,  in  his  stead.  How  the  party  of  Gregory 
and  Alexander  felt  toward  Honorius  is  evinced  by  Peter  Demiani,  who 
denounces  Honorius  as  ■  waster  of  the  church,  root  of  sin,  devil's  herald, 
apostle  of  Antichrist,  an  arrow  from  Satan's  bow,  the  shipwreck  of  all 
purity,  the  man  of  dung,  the  dung  of  the  century,  fodder  for  hell,  an 
abominable,  wriggling  worm.'     Benzo  in  turn  wrote  of  Alexander : 

'  Sed  Prandelli  Asinander,  asinus  haereticus, 

'  Congregavit  Patarinos  ex  viis  et  sepibus, 

'  Et  replevit  totam  terram  urticis  et  vepribus.' 

'  Patarini '  meant  '  ragamuffins.' 

*  The  form  was  gone  through  at  Henry's  instance  by  a  synod  at  Worms 
in  1076,  Henry  feeling  strong  now  through  his  great  victory  over  the 
Saxons  at  Langensalza,  June  9,  1075.  His  letter  conveying  the  decree, 
after  accusing  the  pope  of  numberless  and  nameless  crimes,  ended  :  '  We, 
Henry,  by  the  grace  of  God  king,  with  all  the  bishops  of  our  realm,  com- 
mand thee,  Down,  down.'  Gregory's  anathema  ran  as  follows :  '  St.  Peter, 
Prince  of  the  Apostles,  incline  Thine  ear  unto  us  and  hear  us,  Thy  servant, 
whom  from  childhood  Thou  hast  nourished  and  protected  even  to  this 
day  against  the  ungodly.  Thou  and  my  Lady  the  Mother  of  God,  and 
Thy  Brother,  St.  Paul,  —  prove  to  me  that  Thy  holy  Roman  Church  hath 
drawn  me  against  my  will  to  its  rudder,  and  that  I  have  not  risen  up  like 
a  robber  to  Thy  seat.  Rather  would  I  have  been  a  pilgrim  my  whole  life 
long  than  have  snatched  to  myself  Thy  chair  on  account  of  temporal  glory 
and  a  worldly  mind.  And  therefore  do  I  believe  it  to  proceed  from  Thy 
grace  and  not  from  my  action,  when  it  pleased  and  pleaseth  Thee  that 
the  Christian  people  specially  entrusted  to  Thee  should  hearken  to  me  in 
virtue  of  the  mediatorship  entrusted  to  me;  and  through  Thy  intercession 
hath  power  been  sent  me  from  God  to  bind  and  to  loose  on  earth  and  in 
heaven.  Trusting  in  this,  I,  in  the  name  of  Almighty  God,  the  Father. 
the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  interdict  to  King  Henry,  son  of  Emperor 
Henry,  the  government  of  the  entire  German  and  Italian  realm.  Because 
with  unheard-of  pride  he  hath  lifted  himself  up  against  Thy  Church,  1 
absolve  all  Christians  from  the  bond  of  their  oath  to  him,  and  forbid  them 
to  serve  him  any  longer  as  king.  For  it  is  fitting  that  he  who  will  touch 
the  dignity  of  Thy  Church  should  lose  his  own.  And  since  he  hath  dis- 
dained to  obey  like  a  Christian  and  hath  not  returned  to  God  Whom  he 
deserted,  but  on  the  contrary  hath  been  communing  with  the  excommuni- 


OF    THE    WEST  1 63 

cate,  and  by  his  striving  to  rend  the  Church  hath  separated  himself  from 
her,  so  I  bind  him  in  Thy  stead  with  the  bond  of  the  anathema,  that  all 
people  may  know  and  feel  that  Thou  art  Peter,  and  that  upon  this  Rock 
the  Son  of  the  Living  God  hath  built  his  Church,  against  which  the  gates 
of  hell  cannot  prevail.' 

5  Hefele  strips  off  the  exaggerations  with  which  this  memorable  trans- 
action is  commonly  recounted.  Henry  did  not  wait  at  the  castle  door 
1  three  days  and  nights,'  nor  even  three  days,  but  a  few  hours  each  day. 
Not  in  the  snow  but  under  cover.  Not '  en  chemise '  [Michelet]  or  '  clad 
only  in  the  thin,  white  linen  dress  of  the  penitent'  [Milman],  but  in  a 
penitent's  shirt  over  other  clothing.  Nor  did  the  pope  postpone  audience 
in  order  to  show  his  power  and  humble  the  king,  but  because  he  had 
solemnly  referred  Henry's  case  to  Augsburg,  whither  himself  was  now 
journeying  to  meet  Henry  and  the  German  princes  together,  and  feared  to 
adjudicate  it  in  Italy.  He  at  last  so  far  relented  as  to  absolve  the  king 
but  did  not  restore  the  kingdom.  As  to  penance,  many  a  king  and 
emperor  had  done  it :  Otho  III,  Henry  II,  even  Otho  I.  Henry  III  and, 
later,  St.  Louis,  suffered  themselves  to  be  publicly  flogged.  In  view  of 
Waltram's  silence  touching  it,  Hefele  discredits  the  famous  '  hostia-scene,' 
in  which  Gregory  is  said  to  have  prayed  to  be,  if  guilty,  stricken  dead  as 
he  ate  the  wafer,  and  to  have  vainly  challenged  Henry  to  the  same 
ordeal. 

§  16    The  Concordat  of  Worms,  1122 

Milman,  VII,  iii-v,  VIII,  i-iii.     Giesebrecht,  bk.  viii.    Hefele,  as  at  §  13.    Raumer, 
bk.  ii.     Duruy,  ch.  xvii.     Prutz,  III,  v.     Nitzsch,  bd.  ii,  113-156. 

From  the  crushing  blow  received  at  Canossa  the  em- 
pire never  recovered  either  absolutely  or  in  comparison 
with  the  papacy.  In  the  desperate  war  that  ensued, 
Henry  IV1  and  Henry  V  with  their  rival  popes  both 
scored  brilliant  victories  over  the  papists  with  their  rival 
emperors,  but  these  were  not  permanent.  If  Hilde- 
brand  expired  as  an  exile  at  Salerno,2  his  successors  in- 
herited his  spirit  and  policy.  Urban  II  excommunicated 
Philip3  I  of  France.  Henry  IV  died  a  beggar,  under 
the  ban,  which  Gregory  had  renewed  in  1080.     Calixtus 


1 64  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

II  sat  as  a  court  of  last  resort  for  kings.4  The  crusades, 
now  beginning,  enormously  increased  papal  power.5  By 
the  Concordat  of  Worms,  1122,  Henry  V,  who  at  his 
imperial  coronation  had  seemed  not  less  absolute  than 
his  grandfather,6  after  passing  ten  years  excommunicate, 
bowing  to  Calixtus,  gave  up  investiture  by  ring  and 
staff,  condemned  simony  and  consented  to  the  canonical 
election  and  free  consecration  of  bishops.  On  the  other 
hand  the  outcome  for  the  papacy  fell  far  short  of  the 
majestic  world-monarchy  which  the  great  Hildebrand 
had  planned.7  Ecclesiastics  were  still  to  acquire  their 
principalities  8  and  all  temporal  rights  at  the  touch  of 
the  royal  sceptre,  and  faithfully  to  fulfil  to  the  emperor 
every  obligation  incident  to  their  secular  status. 

1  The  interdict  was  never  removed  and  the  ban  was  pronounced  afresh 
in  1080;  yet  Henry  fully  reconquered  the  headship  of  Germany,  vanquish- 
ing Rudolf,  who  had  been  chosen  against  him,  subdued  his  Italian 
kingdom  though  less  thoroughly,  created  Antipope  Clement  III,  who 
crowned  him  emperor,  and  even  became  master  of  Rome.  His  papal  foes 
ruined  him  at  last  by  procuring  the  rebellion  of  his  sons,  first  Conrad,  then 
Henry  [V] .  Friendless,  even  hungry,  he  was  left  to  beg  in  vain  place  in 
the  choir  of  the  church  of  the  Virgin  in  Spires,  founded  by  himself.  He  had 
been  dead  five  years  ere  his  body  was  allowed  rest  in  consecrated  earth. 

2  His  last  words,  '  I  have  loved  righteousness  and  hated  iniquity,  there- 
fore I  die  in  exile,'  betray  at  once  the  man's  conscious  integrity  and  his 
egotism. 

3  For  the  uncanonical  divorce  of  his  own  wife  and  the  seduction  of 
another  man's. 

4  At  Rheims,  1 1 19,  where  Louis  the  Fat,  of  France,  complained  of 
Henry  I  of  England  for  lack  of  allegiance  as  Duke  of  Normandy  and  for 
yarious  other  faults,  not  one  of  them  of  an  ecclesiastical  nature. 

5  See  last  §  but  one  in  Ch.  VII. 

6  With  the  enthusiastic  and  nearly  entire  allegiance  of  Germany  and 
Italy  he  visited  Rome  and  forced  Paschal  II  to  crown  him  emperor.  We 
notice  that  excommunication  shook  his  authority  far  less  than  it  had  his 
father's. 


OF    THE   WEST  1 65 

7  See  Milman,  bk.  vii,  chaps,  i,  iii. 

8  Except  such  as  might  have  been  conferred  by  the  papacy  itself;  for 
the  papacy  had  large  temporalities  to  bestow  in  different  lands,  over  and 
above  its  spiritual  offices. 


§    17       GUELPH    AND    GHIBELLINE 

Hallam,  ch.  v.     Duruy,  ch.  xviii.     Gicsebrecht,  vol.  iv.    Raumer,  I,  ii,  4  and  5. 
Nitzsch,  bd.  ii,  161-286.    May,  Democracy  in  Europe,  ch.  vii. 

Popes  found  willing  and  mighty  helpers  in  the  great 
imperial  vassals,  bent  on  independence  and  enlarged 
possessions.  Under  Henry  IV  and  his  son,  1056-1125, 
Swabia  was  often  in  revolt,  Saxony  almost  continuously. 
Lothar  III,  1125-37,  by  allying  himself  with  Henry 
the  Proud,1  of  the  Guelph  family  of  Bavarian  dukes,  and 
investing  him  with  Saxony  also,  enrages  Swabia,  which, 
in  Conrad  III,  1138-52,  of  the  brilliant  Hohenstau 
fen  or  Ghibelline  2  line,  next  fills  the  imperial  throne. 
Henry,  inheriting  from  Lothar  the  papal  fief  of  Tus- 
cany 3  and  thus  lord  from  the  Tiber  to  the  Baltic,  rebels 
against  Conrad  and  is  put  to  the  ban,  yet  only  with 
utmost  difficulty  stripped  of  his  duchies.  His  son, 
Henry  the  Lion,  recovers  these  indeed,  but  narrowed 
and  degraded,  Saxony  by  the  loss  of  Brandenburg,4 
Bavaria  by  that  of  Austria.5  Lombard  cities  always 
made  common  cause  with  German  rebels,  as  popes 
with  both,  the  entire  party  of  the  empire's  foes  thus 
formed  coming  to  be  called  '  Guelphs,'  '  Ghibellines  '  in 
like  manner  specifying  all  the  empire's  friends,  Italian 
as  well  as  German.  The  names,  used  in  Germany  to 
this  day,6  had  strongest  life  in  Italy,  where  they  became 
the  watchwords  respectively  of  independence  from  Ger« 
many  and  of  subjection  thereto.7 


1 66        THE  MEDIEVAL  ROMAN  EMPIRE 

1  Henry  the  Proud  had  married  Lothar's  daughter  and  expected 
almost  of  course  to  be  chosen  emperor,  as  would  have  occurred  had  not 
the  Fursten  been  jealous  of  his  already  enormous  power. 

2  '  Guelph'  and  'Ghibelline'  are  the  italianized  forms  of  'Welf'  and 
'  Waiblingen.'  The  latter  are  usually  [the  view  is  now  contested]  thought 
to  have  been  first  used  as  party  words  at  the  battle  of  Weinsberg,  1 140 
[Hie  Welf!  Hie  Waibling  /],  where  Count  Welf,  brother  of  Henry  the 
Proud  [died  1 139],  commanded  against  Duke  Frederic  of  Swabia  [Hoh- 
enstaufen],  whose  seat  was  the  castle  of  Waiblingen.  The  Brunswick  or 
Hanoverian  line  of  English  monarchs  are  descended  from  Henry  Proud, 
through  Henry  the  Lion,  Otho  IV,  and  Otho  '  the  Infant.' 

8  Including  all  the  estates  willed  by  Mathilda  to  the  holy  see,  as  the 
duchy  of  Spoleto  and  the  marches  of  Ancona,  Bologna,  Parma,  Piacenza, 
and  a  few  minor  tracts.     Cf.  §  12,  n.  5. 

4  The  Mark  of  Brandenburg  was  carved  from  the  old  duchy  of  Saxony 
in  1 1 42  and  given  to  Albert  the  Bear  as  an  immediate  fief  of  the  empire. 
He  added  to  it  the  land  between  the  Elbe  and  Oder  mouths.  His  heirs 
retained  the  estate  till  1320,  when  it  passed  to  the  house  of  Bavaria. 
Afterwards  Luxemburg  held  it.  In  141 7  Emperor  Sigismund  sold  it  to 
fce  Hohenzollern,  fathers  of  the  present  reigning  house  of  Prussia,  of 
which  kingdom  it  formed  the  germ. 

6  Gertrude,  widow  of  Henry  Proud,  married  Henry  Jasomirgott  [so 
named  from  his  incessant  oath,  Ja,  so  mir  Gotl  helfe~\,  margrave  of 
Austria,  who  thus  became  seized  of  Bavaria.  Frederic  Barbarossa  restored 
this  duchy  to  Henry  the  Lion,  pacifying  Jasomirgott  by  adding  Styria  to 
his  margraviat  and  erecting  the  whole  into  the  independent  duchy  of 
Austria,  with  special  privileges.  The  particular  history  of  Austria  as  well 
as  of  Prussia  begins  now.  Otho  I  had  made  it  a  margraviat  [Ostmark] 
955,  in  favor  of  the  Babenberg  family,  who  held  it  till  1246.  It  then 
passed  in  succession  to  Frederic  II  and  to  the  houses  of  Baden,  Bohemia 
and  Hapsburg  [1282],  the  last  still  holding  it,  though  in  the  female  or 
Lorraine  line  since  1740  [§  6,  n.  4]. 

6  For  the  foes  and  the  friends  of  the  present  German  empire.  Thus 
the  royal  house  of  Hannover  are  Guelphs  politically  and  not  by  blood 
alone. 

7  While  the  Italian  republics  were  under  the  presidency  of  Charles 
d'Anjou,  of  Naples  [see  last  §  of  this  Ch.]  '  Ghibelline '  named  the  fees 
of  this  presidency,  the  friends  of  liberty.     Sismondi,  Rep.  It.,  ch.  xxii. 


OF   THE   WEST  \6j 

§  1 8     Frederic  I 

Vilman,  VIII,  vii.  Duruy,  275  sqq.  Gzesebrecht,  bk.  x.  Prutz,  IV.  7m/»,  Stcria 
de.'la  lega  lombarda  [1886].  Sismondi,  I,  viii,  ix.  Nitzsch,  bd.  ii,  last  ch. 
Haunter,  bk.  iv. 

After  the  concordat  of  1122  the  quarrel  slumbered. 
Lothar  had  by  explicit  word  and  by  humiliating  deed  x 
confessed  himself  pope's  vassal.  It  proved  a  truce 
only.  The  powerful  Frederic  Barbarossa,  1152-90, 
swore  to  restore  the  empire  to  its  old  eminence  over  the 
pope  and  Italy,  his  chief  spur  to  such  assumption  being 
the  new  study  of  Roman  law.  Imperial  rights  as  ex- 
pounded from  Justinian  by  the  jurisconsults  of  Bologna, 
Frederic  ascribed  without  modification  to  himself.2  This 
Italian  policy,  justifiable  only  technically,  led  him  to 
outrageous  tyranny  and  cruelty.  What  gives  peculiar 
interest  to  this  contest  is  the  brilliant  action  of  those 
republics  which  now  dotted  the  Italian  peninsula  from 
the  Alps  to  Benevento,  restoring  to  a  brief  and  beau- 
tiful life  the  ruins  of  the  Roman  municipal  regime.3 
The  great  modern  struggle  for  liberty  now  begins, 
curiously  identified  in  this  its  earliest  stage  with  that  of 
papal  ambition.  Adrian  IV  and  Alexander  III,  with 
better  reason,  advanced  claims  identical  with  Hilde- 
brand's  as  well  as  in  the  same  proud  tone.  Alexander, 
suzerain  of  Sicily,  Naples,  and  Tuscany,  recognized  by 
the  kings  of  France  and  England  and  supported  by  the 
iron  battalions  of  the  Lombard  League,  overbore  even 
the  arms  and  energy  of  Frederic.  Escaping  with  bare 
life  from  the  battle-field  of  Legnano,  1176,  the  emperor, 
sacrificing  his  own  pope,  submits  to  Alexander.4  By 
the  Treaty  of  Constance,5  11 83,  the   pope  was  again 


l68  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

recognized  as  the  suzerain  of  Tuscany,  and  practical 
independence  granted  to  the  republics,  the  emperor  re- 
taining the  mere  right  to  confirm  their  consuls  and  to 
maintain  in  each  a  court  of  appeal  for  certain  causes. 
But  what  Frederic  lost  in  Italy  he  gained  in  his  German 
kingdom,  by  the  new  and  firm  authority  which  his  divis- 
ion and  new  disposition  of  the  great  duchies  gave  to 
his  government  there.  Henry  the  Lion,  for  desertion 
before  Legnano  and  subsequent  treason,  was  dispos- 
sessed, save  of  Brunswick  and  Ltineburg,  Bavaria  pass- 
ing to  Otho  von  Wittelsbach,6  Bernard,  son  of  Albert 
the  Bear,  becoming  duke  of  Saxony,  which  had  lost 
Westphalia  to  the  archbishopric  of  Cologne. 

1  He  had  held  Pope  Innocent  IPs  stirrup  for  him  to  mount,  understood 
to  be  a  menial  service. 

2  He  also  caused  certain  of  his  own  edicts  to  be  incorporated  in  the 
corpus  iuris  civilis. 

8  Duruy,  274.  Each  had  its  consuls:  Milan,  12,  Genoa  6,  Florence  4, 
Pisa  6,  etc.,  usually  with  both  executive  and  judicial  powers.  Generally 
also  a  sort  of  senate  [credenza]  assisted  them.  But  the  popular  assembly 
was  sovereign  legislature  as  well  as  court  of  last  resort.  Under  Arnold  of 
Brescia,  for  a  brief  time  from  1144,  Rome  formed  such  a  republic.  Fred- 
eric put  down  this  Roman  republic,  delivering  Arnold  to  Pope  Adrian  IV 
to  be  burned,  but  was  so  severe  that  Adrian  soon  turned  against  him. — 
Milman,  VIII,  vi.     Cf.  Ch.  IV,  §  20,  n.  3. 

4  They  met  in  San  Marco,  Venice.  Schnorr  has  a  cartoon  of  the 
scene.  It  may  be  seen  in  the  Dresden  Johanneum,  also  in  the  Ducal 
Palace  at  Venice.     Cf.  Childe  Harold,  hist'l  n.  4. 

6  The  magna  charta  of  the  Italian  republics.     See  Duruy,  279. 

6  Cf.  §  8,  n.  5.  This  re-arrangement  propped  the  emperor's  power 
only  temporarily  however.  The  increased  number  of  the  immediate  vas- 
sals, though  they  were  feebler,  placed  the  central  authority  in  even 
greater  danger  than  before.    Cf.  §  20,  n.  6. 


OF   THE   WEST  169 

§  19    Frederic  II 

Oliphant,  Frederic  II.  Miltnan,  bks.  ix,  x.  Duruy,  282  sqq.  Sismondi,  II,  v-xi, 
Freeman,  Historical  Essays,  iii  ser.  Nitzsch,  bd.  iii,  10-100.  Prittz,  V.  Ran- 
mer,  vol.  iii.     Hoeffer,  Kaiser  Friedrich  II  [a  pamphlet]. 

The  great  struggle  had  still  a  third  period,  the  most 
confused  and  terrific  as  well  as  the  most  decisive  of  all. 
Henry  VI,  by  marriage  with  the  Norman  Princess  Con- 
stantia  of  Naples,  virtually  incorporated  the  kingdom 
of  the  Two  Sicilies  1  with  the  empire,  traversing  the 
policy  of  the  holy  see  and  endangering  its  independence. 
The  papacy  was  now  at  high  meridian,  Innocent  III  in 
both  claim  and  fact  king  of  kings.2  In  order  to  sepa- 
rate Italy  from  the  empire,  under  the  bold  pretence  of 
examining  and  crowning  emperors  if  worthy  or  rejecting 
them  if  unworthy,  he  raised  to  the  throne  the  Guelph, 
Otho  IV,  against  the  Ghibelline  Philip.  But  when 
Otho  defied  him,  and,  ignoring  the  Treaty  of  Constance, 
claimed  suzerainty  over  Tuscany  and  Naples,  Innocent 
deposed  him  in  favor  of  Frederic  II.  It  was  stipulated 
that  the  latter  should  cede  his  hereditary  kingdom  of  the 
Sicilies  to  his  son.  Frederic,  in  the  arts  of  politics 
brilliant  pupil  of  Innocent  himself,  found  means  to 
evade  this,  keeping  his  lands  united  and  encircling 
Rome  with  imperial  domains.  To  break  this  wall,  pope 
must  crush  emperor.  Excuses  were  ready.  Besides 
mockery  of  pope's  claim  to  world-suzerainty,  Gregory  IX 
charged  3  upon  Frederic  rebellion  and  breach  of  trust  as 
papal  fief-holder  of  the  Sicilies,  alliance  with  Saracens, 
neglect  of  vow  in  not  earlier  embarking  as  crusader, 
contempt  of  ecclesiastical  discipline,  and  infidelity. 
Frederic's  two  bloody  but  triumphant  campaigns,  (i)  to 


1^0  THE    MEDLEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

the  Peace  of  San  Germano,  1230,  and  (2)  to  Gregory's 
death,  1241,  added  splendid  fame  as  a  soldier  to  the  re- 
nown which  this  wonder  of  the  world  already  possessed 
as  poet,  philosopher  and  theologian.  In  (1)  he  entirely 
reduced  the  great  North  Italian  revolt  which  Gregory 
had  instigated  during  Frederic's  crusade,4  in  (2)  a  re- 
bellion of  his  own  son  allied  with  the  new  Lombard 
League.  Gregory  died  in  despair.  The  papacy  was 
throttled  and  for  a  moment  quivered  as  in  death-throes. 

1  I.e.,  Naples  and  Sicily.  Henry  VI  was  Frederic  Barbarossa's  son, 
Frederic  II's  father.  Lower  Italy  was  thus  virtually  brought  into  the 
empire,  though  never  constitutionally.  Mark  the  confusion.  As  resident 
and  bishop  of  Rome  the  pope  was  a  subject  [if  not  fief-holder]  of  the 
empire.  On  the  other  hand,  as  possessor  of  Naples  and  Sicily,  inheriting 
from  the  Norman  kings  there,  Frederic  was  of  course  the  pope's  vassal, 
besides  being  what  every  Christian  monarch  professed  to  be,  subject  to 
the  pope  as  Christ's  vicar  and  in  that  sense  world-suzerain. 

2  Schulte,  205;  Duruy,  280,  385;  Creighton,  I,  19  sqq.  Innocent  III 
was  the  pope  who,  to  discipline  King  John  of  England,  authorized  Philip 
Augustus  of  France  to  invade  John's  kingdom,  and  who,  when  John  had 
basely  submitted,  sought  to  annul  the  Great  Charter. 

8  Nearly  all  these  indictments  were  as  true  as  some  of  them  were 
grave.  From  the  point  of  view  of  the  then  orthodoxy  Frederic  was  cer- 
tainly an  infidel.  He  was  alleged  and  believed  to  have  expressed  the  sen- 
timent that  the  world  had  been  deceived  by  three  impostors,  Moses,  Christ 
and  Mohammed.  Frederic  II  alone  of  all  the  imperial  line  Dante  leaves 
in  hell.  —  Inferno,  x,  119.  Yet  he  put  forth  edict  after  edict  against  here- 
tics and  asseverated  his  orthodoxy  to  the  last.  It  would,  indeed,  seem 
that  his  first  excommunication,  for  not  persisting  in  the  crusading-voyage 
which  he  had  begun,  was  unjust.  He  was  driven  back  by  a  tempest,  him- 
self and  men  ill.  The  pope's  main  hostility  to  Frederic  was  political, 
springing  from  the  determination  to  keep  the  Sicilies  separate  from  the 
empire,  contrary  to  Frederic's  will.  Hence  Gregory  would  not  desert  the 
Lombard  League. 

4  Frederic  did  at  length  go  as  crusader  [Ch.  VII,  §  15]  only  to  be 
balked  at  every  turn  by  the  pope's  minions.  Matthew  of  Paris  says  that 
the  Templars  of  the  Holy  Land  made  overtures  to  the  sultan  of  Egypt  tg 


OF   THE   WEST  171 

betray  Frederic  to  him,  but  that  the  Mohammedan  ruler  refused  partner- 
ship in  such  treachery.  He  and  Frederic  became  warm  friends,  and  the 
cession  of  Jerusalem  was  by  him.  It  grieved  the  knights  that  the  Musul- 
mans  were  allowed  to  retain  a  mosque  on  the  site  of  Solomon's  temple, 
with  the  privileges  of  living  and  visiting  in  Jerusalem  and  being  tried 
there  by  judges  of  their  own.  Antioch,  with  Tripoli  and  its  other  depend- 
encies, had  not  been  included  in  the  ten  years'  truce.  Frederic  had  to 
crown  himself  king  of  Jerusalem  [his  seventh  crown],  as  no  ecclesiastic 
would  perform  the  ceremony.  Returning,  Frederic  found  his  son  and  the 
powerful  Lombard  League  in  revolt,  and  conquered  both  in  the  great  vic- 
tory of  Corte  Nuova,  1237.  Gregory  now  fought  him  with  redoubled 
energy.  To  win  sympathy  in  Europe  he  called  a  council  at  the  Lateran 
in  Rome  for  124 1.  A  naval  victory  over  the  Genoese  at  Meloria  in  that 
year  threw  nearly  all  the  delegates  [proceeding  by  sea]  into  the  emperor's 
hands.     The  aged  Gregory  died  from  this  reverse. 


§  20     Fall  of  the  Hohenstaufen 

Hallam,  ch.  iii.    Duruy,  284  sqq.    Milman,  X,  iv,  v.    Bryce,  xiii.    Prutz,  V.    Free- 
man, Historical  Essays  [i  ser.]  xi.     Nitzsch,  bd.  iii,  ioi-:3Q.     Raumer,  vol.  iii. 

Suddenly  fortune  changed.  From  Gregory's  death 
to  his  own  in  1250,  incessant  reverse  whelmed  Frederic. 
Treason  was  all  about  him.  Thrice  excommunicate, 
deserted  by  old  friends,  Christian  kings  either  against 
him  or  too  listless  to  aid,1  even  his  genius,  quenchless 
energy  and  Saracen2  supports  were  vain.  He  indeed 
fought  with  vigor  to  the  last,  dying  unconquered.  Still 
was  it  already  clear,  such  was  now  the  moral  weight  of 
the  papal  office  and  the  horror  of  Frederic  as  an  un- 
believer, that  Innocent  IV,  the  new  pope,  even  in  exile 
as  he  was,  must  finally  prevail.  The  result  was  assured 
and  greatly  hastened  by  the  emperor's  death.  The 
Guelphs  at  last  rose  to  the  ascendant.  From  this  mo- 
ment the  empire  declined  in  significance.3  Conrad  IV, 
who  held   it  till   his  death,   1254,  was  the  last  Caesar 


1^2  THE    MEDIAEVAL    ROMAN    EMPIRE 

of  the  Swabian  line,  the  race  itself  presently  dying  out. 
Conradin,  his  son,  who  had  gone  to  help  his  uncle,  King 
Manfred,  in  Naples  against  Charles  d'Anjou,  the  pope's 
newly  chosen  vassal  there,  perished  on  the  scaffold  in 
1268.  Italy  and  Burgundy  lost,  the  empire  retained 
after  the  Interregnum  only  the  vocation,  without  the 
ancient  power,  of  a  German  kingdom.  The  house  of 
France 4  now  succeeds  to  the  preponderance  of  the  em- 
perors, and  with  it  the  church,  mighty  through  its  rev- 
enues, arrogant  from  the  rising  study  of  canon  law,5 
will  next  have  to  struggle. 

1  The  intelligent  laity  in  all  Europe  sympathized  to  a  great  extent  with 
Frederic.  So  devoted  a  churchman  as  St.  Louis  expostulated  with  Inno- 
cent IV  for  his  high  assumption.  For  a  strong  resolution  of  the  French 
barons  in  the  same  sense,  Martin,  Hist,  de  France,  IV,  209  sq.  Robert 
d'Artois,  St.  Louis's  brother,  refused  the  imperial  crown  offered  him  by 
Gregory  IX,  reproaching  this  pontiff  with  the  wish  to  trample  all  mon- 
archs  under  his  feet.     Yet  Charles  d'Anjou  accepted  the  Sicilies. 

2  It  was  only  by  the  aid  of  Saracens,  who  of  course  cared  nothing  for 
the  pope's  interdict,  that  Frederic  was  enabled  to  hold  out  so  long.  His 
resort  to  such  allies  naturally  enraged  popes  all  the  more,  as  calculated  to 
open  the  way  for  those  infidels  to  a  permanent  footing  in  Christendom. 

3  Cf.  §  6.  The  interregnum  is  sometimes  reckoned  from  Frederic's  d., 
sometimes  from  Conrad's.  Some  writers  end  it  in  1257,  with  the  election 
of  Richard  of  Cornwall,  but  as  neither  he  nor  his  rival,  Alphonso  of 
Castile,  ever  reigned,  we  protract  the  interregnum  to  the  election  of 
Rudolf,  1273.  See  Bryce,  212.  Not  only  was  the  interregnum  itself  a 
dreadful  time,  but  so  close  an  approach  to  out  and  out  independence  had 
been  yielded  by  Frederic  II  to  his  great  German  vassals  that  it  was  hence- 
forth impossible  for  even  great  men,  being  emperors,  to  wield  the  power 
of  a  Barbarossa,  a  Henry  the  Black  or  an  Otho. 

4  See  later  §§  of  next  Ch.  Monarchy  was  now  becoming  emphatically 
dominant  in  France  itself,  just  as  it  was  losing  its  hold  in  the  empire.  In 
addition  to  this  the  passing  of  Naples  and  Sicily  under  French  rule  could 
not  but  lend  distinction  to  the  French  name  and  increase  French  influence 
in  world-affairs.     Jealousy  resulted.     Peter  III  of  Aragon,  who  had  mar- 


OF    THE    WEST  I 73 

ried  Constantia,  Manfred's  daughter,  recovers  Sicily,  occasioning  the 
'Sicilian  Vespers'  Mar.  30,  1282.  See  Duruy,  479;  Sismondi,  Rep  It., 
ch.  xxii;  Amari,  H.  of  the  W.  of  the  Sic.  Vespers,  3  v.;  Martin,  IV, 
319  sqq.  The  Sicilians  had  unanimously  favored  Conradin  and  for  that 
reason  were  oppressed  by  the  French.  Michael  Palaeologus,  eastern 
emperor,  aided  Peter  with  money,  knowing  that  Charles  had  designs  on 
his  realm.  Even  Pope  Nicholas  III,  I277-'8i,  had  been  in  the  league 
against  Charles.  Nearly  every  Frenchman  in  Sicily  was  massacred. 
From  Peter's  conquest  till  1295  Sicily  was  connected  directly  with  Aragon, 
thence  till  1410  under  domestic  monarchs  of  the  Aragon  house,  then  again 
under  Aragon  [Ferdinand  the  Just],  whose  King  Alphonso  V  conquers 
Naples  in  1442,  thus  again  uniting  Naples  with  Sicily.  At  his  death,  1458, 
they  were  parted,  his  brother  John  becoming  king  of  Aragon  and  Sicily, 
while  his  natural  son,  Ferdinand,  assumed  the  crown  of  Naples,  his  line 
going  out  at  the  new  French  conquest  by  Louis  XII  of  France  in  1501. 
Ferdinand  the  Catholic's  conquest  of  Naples,  1505,  brought  Naples  afresh 
under  the  same  rule  with  Sicily,  as  they  remained  till  1707.  Soon  after 
this,  in  the  W.  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  Austria  secured  possession  of 
both,  ceding  Sicily  to  Savoy  in  1713.  Spain  conquered  the  Island  once 
more  in  1718,  uniting  it  with  Naples  in  1720.  In  1735,  Don  Carlos, 
younger  son  of  the  Bourbon  Philip  V  of  Spain,  was  crowned  king  of  the 
Two  Sicilies,  his  line  reigning,  except  during  the  French  occupation 
[1806-15:  Joseph  Bonaparte  King  of  Naples  2  years,  Murat  7]  till  1861, 
when  Sicily  became  part  of  the  present  kingdom  of  Italy. 

5  Canon  law  began  to  have  its  present  form,  as  a  special  system  and 
study,  separate  from  the  civil,  in  the  time  of  Gregory  IX. 


SELECT    BIBLIOGRAPHY   TO   CHAPTER   VI 

'  Feudalism '  and  '  France '  in  Encyc.  Brit.  The  Student's  France. 
Hallam,  Milman.  Duruy,  Guizot  [Civ.  in  Europe,  iv,  and  Civ.  in  Fr., 
2d  Course,  are,  with  Hallam,  ch.  ii,  the  best  lit.  in  Eng.  on  feudalism], 
Stille,  Maitland,  Michelet  and  Prutz  as  in  last  Bibliog.  Secretan, 
Essai  sur  la  feodalile**  [best  single  work  on  feudalism].  Roth,  Bene- 
ficialwesen  ;  **  Feudalitat  u.  Unterthanenverband.**  Lehuerou,  In- 
stitutions Merovingiennes  ;  do.  Carolingiennes.  Giraud,  Droit  francais 
an  moyen  age,  2  v.  Perreciot,  Personnes  et  terres  dans  les  Gaules,  3  v. 
Desmaze,  Parlement  de  Paris.  Bancroft  [Jane  M.],  Parliament  of  Paris, 
etc.  [dissertation].  Kitchin,  H.  of  Fr.,  bks.  iii,  iv.  Sismondi,  Hist,  des 
Franfais,  2  v.  Masson,  St.  Louis  and  the  13th  Century  [Ep.  of  Fr.  H.]. 
Stubbs,  Const'l  H.  of  Eng.,  esp.  ch.  ix.  De  Coulanges,  Institutions 
polilques  de  lancienne  Fr. ;  Eludes  sur  quelques  froblemes  d'ftisl. ;  les 
engines  du  regime  feodal  [Rev.  d.  d.  Mondes,  1872,  1874].  Luchaire, 
Hist,  des  institutions  de  Fr.,  etc.  [under  first  4  Capetians],  2  v.  Flach, 
Les  origines  de  Pancienne  Fr.,  le  regime  seigtieurial  [ix  &  x  cent. :  vol. 
i,  1886].  Deloche,  La  trustis  et  Pantrustion  royal  sous  les  deux  pre- 
mieres races.**  Clark,  H.  of  Knighthood,  2  v.  Mills,  do.  of  Chivalry, 
2  v.  Pardessus,  Loi  salique.  Maine,  Anc.  Law;**  Village  Communi- 
ties;** Early  Law  and  Custom.**  Seignobos,  Regime  feodal  en  Bour- 
gogne,  etc.  [1882].  Waitz,  Verfassungsgesch. ;  Anfange  d.  Vassalitdt ; 
do.  d.  Lehnwesens  [in  v.  Sybel's  Zeitschrift,  XIII,  90  sqq.].  Braumann, 
de  leudibus  in  regno  Meroving.  [Berol.  1865].  Gu£rard,  Prolegomenes 
au  Polyptique  de  Vabbe  Irminon  [1845:  the  most  renowned  of  the  old 
works,  and  without  parallel  for  late  Caroling,  and  early  Capetian  times]. 
Montesquieu,  Sp.  of  the  Laws.  Naudet,  Memoire  sur  Petal  des  per- 
sonnes sous  les  rois  de  la  premiere  race  [Tome  viii  of  Mem.  de  I'Acad. 
des  inscr.  et  belles-lettres.  Comparable  with  Guerard].  Blanqui,  H.  of 
Pol.  Econ.  Sohm,  Altdeutsche  Reichs,  u.  Gerichtsverfassung.**  Digby, 
H.  of  Real  Property.     Bastard  d'Estang,  Parlements  de  France,  2  v. 


CHAPTER  VI 

FEUDALISM   AND   THE   FRENCH   MONARCHY 


§  i     Feudalism  defined 

Hallam,  ch.  ii.     Guizot,  Civ.  in  France,  2d  course,  ii.     Rotk,  F.  u.  U.,  27,  31. 

Turning  from  the  mere  external  political  frame  of 
mediaeval  society  more  to  its  inner  nature,  we  encounter 
at  the  outset  the  ubiquitous  fact  of  feudalism.  Inextri- 
cably connected  with  this  is  the  French  monarchy, 
whereof  it  destroyed  one  dynasty  and  provided  another. 
Unavoidable  allusions  to  the  institution  have  been  made 
already  :  we  must  now  subject  it  to  study.  The  consti- 
tutive elements  of  feudalism  were  (i)  the  hierarchical 
gradation  of  social-political  ranks,  (2)  bound  together 
not  by  political  loyalty  but  by  the  covenanted  protec- 
tion of,  and  personal  fealty 1  from,  each  lower  by  and  to 
each  higher,  (3)  based  upon  land.2  A  secondary  ele- 
ment of  feudalism  resulting  from  the  above  is  that  it 
forms  the  negation  of  the  state  in  the  proper  political 
sense.3  This  remarkable  social  formation,  as  different 
from  earlier  as  from  later,  presents  itself,  from  the  tenth 
century,  in  France,  Germany,  Italy,  Spain  and  Eng- 
land :  that  is,  wherever  German  life  and  institutions  met 
Roman.  The  Normans  developed  it  most  perfectly  at 
home,  reformed   and   furthered   it   in   England,  trans- 


I76  FEUDALISM   AND    THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY 

planted  it  to  Lower  Italy  and  Palestine.  Even  Hun- 
gary, Poland  and  Denmark  were  more  or  less  affected 
by  it. 

1  For  convenience  '  fealty '  is  here  used  as  including  '  homage.'  In  full 
feudal  times  they  were  identical,  though  not  at  first.  Originally  fealty  was 
mere  recognition  of  superiority,  not  necessarily  connected  with  land,  while 
homage  was  subordination  in  respect  to  land.  —  Secretan,  120  sqq.,  309; 
Hallam,  ch.  ii,  pt.  i.  Simple  homage  could  be  offered  to  each  of  several 
superiors,  liege  homage  to  but  one.  —  Secretan,  310. 

2  '  Profound  materialism :  man  fixed  to  land,  rooted  to  the  rock  where 
his  tower  rises.  No  land  without  lord,  no  lord  without  land.  Man  has 
become  a  thing  of  locality,  rated  as  of  high  or  low  place,  localized,  immo- 
bile, weighted  by  the  mass  of  his  heavy  cMteau  as  of  his  heavy  armor. 
The  land  is  the  man :  to  it  pertains  the  veritable  personality.  In  the 
phrase  of  the  middle  age,  the  man  must  serve  his  fief  ?  —  Michelet. 

3  This  phase  is  well  exhibited  in  both  Roth's  works.  The  tie  holding 
vassal  and  suzerain  together  was  in  reality  nothing  but  private  contract. 
—  Secretan,  195  sqq. 

§  2     Its  Modifications 

Hallam,  ch.  ii,  pt.  ii.     Secretan,  preface. 

In  point  of  historical  evolution  feudalism  presents 
four  periods :  i  Of  formation,  to  the  end  of  the  ninth 
century,  ii  Of  power,  to  the  end  of  the  thirteenth. 
We  may  take  as  the  beginning  of  this  epoch,  as  a  quasi- 
legal  establishment  of  feudalism,  the  capitulary l  of 
Charles  the  Bald,  877,  placing  their  offices,  as  their 
benefices  already  were,  entirely  in  the  power  of  his 
great  vassals,  iii  Of  transformation,  to  the  end  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  iv  Of  decay,  to  the  present  time.2 
In  respect  to  geographical  distribution  feudalism  com- 
prises three  types :  1  Normal  feudalism  or  feudalism 
upon  its  native  soil,  that  of  the  great  Frankish  monar- 
chy.    Within  this  sphere  too  the  system  had  various 


FEUDALISM   AND    THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY  1 77 

phases,  main  and  subordinate,  French  feudalism  differ- 
ing from  German,  Norman  from  South  French,  German 
proper  from  Lombard-Italian.3  2  Transplanted,  in 
Norman  England,  Norman  Italy  and  Palestine.  In 
each  of  these  lands  the  historical  type  suffered  impor- 
tant modifications,  in  England  away  from,  in  Palestine 
toward,  abstract  perfection  of  system.  3  Inchoate,  as 
in  Spain  and  in  the  Scandinavian  North,  where,  in  the 
one  case  Roman  law  and  custom,  in  the  other,  Teutonic, 
shaped  and  hindered  the  development. 

1  '  French  royalty's  act  of  abdication  in  favor  of  feudalism,'  says  Secre- 
tan,  '  the  heredity  of  functions  is  erected  into  law :  the  feudal  era  begins.' 
Charles  the  Bald  had  just  bought  peace  from  the  Normans,  unable  to 
conquer  them,  and  was  intending  [in  vain:  he  died  the  same  year]  to 
make  a  campaign  into  Italy,  summoned  by  the  pope.  The  concession  was 
given  as  the  price  of  military  aid.  Guizot  and  most  writers  have  mistaken 
this  capitulary  as  relating  to  benefices. 

2  Cf.  Maine's  Essay,  in  Early  Law  and  Custom,  on  the  Decay  of  Feudal 
Property  in  Fr.  and  Eng.  '  That  war  [between  rational  and  feudal  law] 
will  terminate  for  France  only  at  the  grand  date  of  1789  [the  Revolution], 
by  the  triumph  of  equity  over  privilege.  For  the  countries  of  Europe 
which  have  not  gone  in  our  path  it  is  not  at  an  end  even  now.'  —  Duruy. 
So  late  as  1536  Francis  I  went  through  the  vain  form  of  summoning 
Emperor  Charles  V  before  the  Parliament  of  Paris  to  answer  for  delin- 
quency as  Francis's  vassal  for  Artois  and  Flandre. 

8  For  the  weightiest  of  these  differences,  see  §§  13-15. 

§  3     Its  Causes 

Maine,  Village  Communities,  i,  iii-v.     Blanqui,  Hist,  of  Pol.  Economy,  ch.  x.     Seen- 
tan,  8  sqq.     Stubbs,  ch.  iii. 

The  causes  of  feudalism  may  be  classified  as  remote 
and  direct.  Chief  among  the  remote  should  be  men- 
tioned :  1  Incorrigible  individualism  on  the  part  of  the 
German  race.1     2  Ignorance  and  barbarism.     The  feu- 


I78  FEUDALISM    AND    THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY 

dal  ages  were  indeed  not  devoid  of  intelligence :  the 
light  of  classical  times  had  not  gone  out.  But  it  had 
become  entirely  theological,  non-political.  The  policy 
of  the  church  was  to  discourage  political  study  and 
thinking.2  The  steadiness  projected  from  the  Roman 
state  had  been  dissipated,  while  the  thoughtfulness  and 
self-restraint  necessary  to  a  reign  of  law  were  not  yet 
born.  3  Poverty.  The  revenues  requisite  for  a  salaried 
public  service  not  being  obtainable,  maintenance  of 
order  was  forced  to  connect  itself  with  ownership  and 
use  of  land.  Such  necessity  seems  to  have  marked  a 
phase  in  the  early  life  of  every  people.3  The  phenome- 
non which  we  here  study,  at  any  rate,  simply  marks  a 
general  process  of  land  feudalization  characterizing  a 
certain  grade  in  the  political  and  economic  growth  of 
all  the  Aryan  peoples.  The  universal  primitive  form  of 
land  ownership  was  the  collective.4  The  invasions 
found  the  German  village  communities,  where  those  of 
India  are  to-day,  just  emerging  from  this.  Headmen  of 
clans  seized  part  of  the  land  as  their  private  possession,5 
and  asserted  over  the  rest  a  guardianship  which  gradu- 
ally merged  into  a  suzerainty.6  The  primitive,  demo- 
cratic community  turned  into  a  manor.  We  thus  see 
that  grants  of  land  did  not  originate  feudal  practice  but 
only  aided 7  it,  which  explains  the  partial  feudalization 
of  non-Roman  Germany  and  of  Saxon  England. 

1  Roth  in  the  Einleitung  of  his  F.  u.  U.  protests  against  this  estimate, 
and  scolds  Niebuhr  for  agreeing  with  F.  Schlegel  that  '  the  German's  true 
constitution  is  anarchy.' 

2  Accordingly  when,  under  Philip  Augustus,  Roman  law  came  to  be 
ardently  studied  in  France,  the  pope  solemnly  forbade  the  monks  to  take 
it  up.     Cf.  Martin,  France,  IV,  91. 


FEUDALISM    AND   THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY  1 79 

*  See  Maine,  V.  C,  v;   Secretan,  8  sqq. 

4  De  Laveleye,  Primitive  Property. 

5  On  the  transition  from  Mark  to  manor,  besides  Maine,  v,  see  Kemble, 
Saxons  in  England,  I,  54  sqq.  The  Mark  was  a  group  of  households 
democratically  organized  and  governed,  cultivating  in  common;  the  manor 
a  group  of  tenants  to  a  lord,  aristocratically  organized  and  governed.  See 
Ch.  IV,  §  9,  n.  2. 

6  Communities  might  likewise,  by  conquest  or  by  colonization,  win 
suzerainty  over  other  communities.  —  Maine,  146. 

7  Although  feudalism  could  spring  up  without  grants  of  land,  such  grants 
would  powerfully  further  it,  partly  by  increasing  the  number  of  the  chiefs 
tenants,  partly  by  binding  beneficiaries  more  closely  to  him.  We  can 
hence  understand  the  rank  growth  of  the  system  in  France  as  well  as  the 
weak  in  Saxon  England. 


§  4    Common  Theory  of  Origin 

Martin,  H.  de  Fr.,  vol.  i.  Guizot,  Lect.,  vol.  iii,  339  sqq.;  Essais  sur  Pkist.de 
France,  iv,  v.  Secretan,  ch.  i.  Stubbs,  ch.  ix.  Freeman,  Norman  Conquest, 
ch.  iii.    Roth,  Bvv.,  Vorwort,  also  107,  108. 

As  the  direct  roots  of  the  system  reference  has  usu- 
ally been  had  to  four  earlier  institutions,  three  Roman, 
the  fourth  German,  viz.,  those  (i)  of  clients,1  (2)  of  the 
coloni,2  (3)  of  the  laeti,3  (4)  of  the  comitatus.4  The 
great  majority  of  qualified  scholars  have  regarded  the 
last  of  these  as  the  specially  active  principle,  operating 
from  the  moment  of  the  invasion  upon  all  the  others, 
particularly  upon  that  of  the  coloni,  and  have  explained 
feudalism  as  the  effect,  gradual  but  speedy,  of  the  thus 
blended  forces.  This  theory  regards  Chlodovech  a 
mere  irresponsible  chieftain  with  comitatus,  rather  than 
a  proper  king  with  subjects,  a  centre  of  strict  public 
power.  The  men  of  his  vast  comitatus,  swearing  fidel- 
ity, not  political  but  to  him  as  a  person,  receive  the 
crown  lands,  partly  in  an  allodial,5  partly  in  a  beneficiary 


180  FEUDALISM   AND   THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY 

way,  on  condition  of  special  service  in  the  Heerbann, 
which  they  alone  constitute.  Then  through  the  gen- 
eral transformation  of  allodial  into  beneficiary  lands, 
and  the  analogy  and  cooperation  of  the  colon  i-arrange- 
ment  already  dominating  the  other  extremity  of  society, 
a  single,  relatively  homogeneous  system  is  formed,  which 
passes  without  essential  jar,  though  of  course  not  with- 
out some  modification,  from  Merovingian  to  Carolingian 
times. 

1  Two  of  the  regular  feudal  '  aids,'  the  ransom  of  a  seignior  from  cap- 
tivity and  gift  of  dowry-money  on  the  marriage  of  his  eldest  daughter,  were 
perfect  analogues  of  obligations  which  Roman  clients  owed.  —  Ortolan,  Ex- 
plication des  Instituts  de  Justinien,  I,  23.  The  third  regular  feudal  aid 
was  for  knighting  the  lord's  eldest  son.  Besides  the  aids  were  other  ■  feudal 
incidents ' :  i)  the  relief,  a  payment  by  a  deceased  vassal's  heir  on  his  suc- 
cession, ii)  ouster lemains  or  half-years'  profits  paid  to  lord  when  a  male 
ward  became  21  or  a  female  16,  iii)  escheats  of  lands  to  lords  on  failure  of 
tenants'  heirs,  iv)  forfeitures  for  crime  involving  corruption  of  blood, 
v)  wardship  or  use  by  lord  of  the  profits  of  land  during  minority  of  ward, 
and  vi)  marriage  or  the  right  of  a  lord,  lest  he  should  get  an  enemy  for 
vassal,  to  dispose  of  his  female  ward  in  marriage  on  her  attaining  14  years 
of  age,  to  enjoy  her  revenues  till  21  if  she  refused  and  of  then  at  will  with- 
holding consent  to  her  marriage.  Premier  seizin  was  an  extra  relief  paid 
by  tenants  in  chief. 

2  Whatever  else  is  uncertain,  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  this  insti- 
tution survived  till  taken  up  into  feudalism,  for  the  entire  system  of  which, 
so  far  as  related  to  land,  it  furnished,  as  it  were,  the  schema.  Cf.  Savigny, 
sur  le  colonat  romain,  in  journal  pour  la  science  historique  du  droit, 
vol.  vi  [1828],  273  sqq.    [Trans,  in  Philolog.  Museum,  vol.  ii.] 

8  Laeti  held  by  the  tenure  called  in  Roman  law  emphyteusis.  It  in- 
volved usufruct  and  full  right  of  disposition  in  every  way,  but  not  the 
actual  fee  simple  or  dominium.  —  Justinian's  Institutes,  bk.  iii,  24,  3.  It 
was  nearer  to  freehold  than  is  the  English  copyhold,  which  permits  the 
landlord  to  work  any  mines  discovered  under  the  estate.  Perreciot's  theory 
derives  the  entire  system  of  feudalism  from  the  laeti.  He  cites  many 
undoubted  passages  where,  when  feudalism  was  at  its  strongest,  leudes  or 
holders  of  fiefs  are  called  '  servi,'  as  laeti  were,  and  he  thinks  the  difference 


FEUDALISM    AND    THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY  l8l 

between  lords  and  servi  [serfs]  to  have  been  at  first  slight,  increasing  little 
by  little.  Guerard,  on  the  contrary,  will  not  admit  any  analogy  between 
Roman  laeti  and  the  Merovingian  leudes.  Secretan  [204]  holds  that 
there  is  analogy,  but  not,  as  Perreciot  contends,  identity.  He  acutely 
observes  that  Perreciot's  passages  all  relate  to  Alsace,  Lorraine  and  the 
other  border-lands  between  France  and  Germany,  making  it  probable  that 
'servi'  is  used  in  them  simply  for  '  ministeria/es'  [see  §  13],  and  has  no 
reference  to  the  laeti-system.  Merivale,  Gen.  H.  of  Rome,  581,  calls 
emphyteusis  '  a  sort  of  feudal  tenure.' 

4  See  Ch.  IV,  §  1 1  and  n.  Montesquieu  was  the  first  writer  to  empha- 
size the  influence  of  the  comitatus  in  originating  or  shaping  feudalism. 
The  habit  had  earlier  been  to  refer  it  entirely  to  Roman  sources :  view  of 
the  Roman  school,  founded  by  Abbe  Dubos  [//.  critique  d  elablissement 
de  la  mon.  francaise\  and  best  represented  at  present  by  Fustel  de  Cou- 
langes.  The  latter  declares  that  there  existed  in  Germany  nothing  resem- 
bling the  feudal  regime,  but  that  this  manifested  all  its  germs  in  a  very 
marked  manner  under  the  Roman  empire.  —  Rev.  d.  d.  Mondes,  Mai,  1872. 
This  is  partly  the  same  question  canvassed  at  Ch.  IV,  §  10. 

6  'Allods'  [allodia]  were  estates  in  fee  simple,  thus  differing  from  bene- 
fices. Cf.  §7.  'Allod'  perhaps  ='  Odal,'  old-German  for  both  land- 
ownership  and  nobility,  related  to  '  Adel.'  See  Stubbs,  vol.  i,  53;  Secretan, 
96,  n.  The  etymology,  however,  is  doubtful.  '  Alod'  may  be  connected 
with  'Loos,'  'lot,'  *  allot,'  etc.,  or  from  old-German  '  Od,'  =  property,  which 
Guizot  [Civ.  in  Fr.,  vol.  Hi,  343]  makes  the  basis  of  '  feodum  '  or  'feudum,' 
the  Latin  word  for  fief,  'fee'  [=  money:  cf.  Ger.  Vieh  =  cattle;  Sax. 
Romfeoh  —  Peter's  pence]  being  the  other  radical. 

§  5     Roth's  View 

Roth,  as  in  the  bibliog.     Stubbs,  vol.  i,  251.     Kauftnann,  Deutsche  Geschichte,  vol.  i, 

12  sq.,  129  sqq. 

In  recent  years  this  more  common  theory  of  the  rise 
of  feudalism  has  been  assailed  with  prodigious  learning 
and  energy  by  Professor  Roth  of  Munich,  who  affirms 
the  Merovingian  to  have  been  a  genuine  state,  as  free 
from  feudal  elements  as  the  Roman  or  the  choicest 
modern,  whatever  in  it  resembled  the  feudal  system, 
except  if  one  will  the  antrustionate  or  king's  comitatus, 


1 82    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

being  of  a  purely  private  nature.  All  crown  lands  were 
ceded,  he  believes,  allodially,  as  veritable  property,  none 
of  them  in  fief.  Recipients  of  these  estates  did  not 
alone  form  the  Heerbann,  took  to  the  king  no  special 
oath,  vassal  or  other,  and  were  under  no  bond  whatever 
to  him  save  that  of  political  loyalty,  which  rested  upon 
all.  Public  law,  not  private  contract,  was  the  basis  of 
social  order.  According  to  this  adroit  hypothesis,  feu- 
dalism proper  had  origin  only  in  the  ninth  century, 
under  the  sons  of  Karl  Martell,  the  great  innovation  by 
these  rulers  being  not  a  generalization  of  the  Heer- 
bann x  but  their  secularization  of  ecclesiastical  lands  in 
benefice  to  their  supporters.  Roth,  Sohm,  and  even 
Waitz,  seem  to  exaggerate  the  political  character  of  in- 
stitutions under  the  first  race.  On  students  free  from 
German  prejudice  the  sources  produce  the  impression 
that  while  Merovingian  government  was  a  state  in  form, 
and  over  the  Roman  population  also  in  fact,  the  Franks 
themselves  were  for  long  held  to  their  king  by  a  tie 
conceived  not  as  private  in  distinction  from  political, 
still  not  yet  as  exactly  political,  Chlodovech  standing 
midway  between  comitatus-chief  and  king  proper.2 

1  Loebell  has  shown  that  the  Merovittgians  required  military  service 
from  the  whole  population,  Roman  as  well  as  Frankish.  Roth  admits  that 
the  kings  of  the  first  race  had  their  antrustions.  See  next  n.  On  these 
appropriations  of  church  lands,  Milman,  vol.  ii,  391. 

3  Naudet,  449,  thus  sums  up:  i  Under  the  first  race  nobility  was  at- 
tached to  the  title  of  '  leud?  '  antrustio,'  'fidelis'  and  was  consequently 
personal,  ii  Leudes  did  not  necessarily  have  benefices,  but  every  bene- 
ficed man  was  a  leud.  The  benefice  brought  with  it  jurisdiction,  hence 
increase  of  dignity,  iii  Heredity  of  benefices  resulted  from  custom,  not 
from  law.  Each  fidelis  at  court  would  seek  to  secure  for  his  son  the  suc- 
cession to  his  antrustionate,  and  to  his  benefice  if  possessing  one.     At  last 


FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY     183 

heredity  became  a  right  in  both,  iv  Concessions  of  domains  in  full  prop- 
erty began  only  under  the  successors  of  Dagobert  [III,  71 1— '16],  at  nearly 
the  same  time  with  the  usurpation  of  the  seigniories.  A  seigniory  at  first 
differed  much  from  an  hereditary  benefice,  as  the  latter  did  not  then  give 
its  possessor  the  right  to  homage  from  residents  under  his  jurisdiction. 
Roth  derives  feudalism  from  three  relations,  i  the  antrustionate,  ii  grants 
of  benefices,  iii  the  seigniorate  or  subjection  of  free  men  to  other  free 
men.  Only  the  first,  he  alleges,  existed  under  the  first  race.  —  F.  u.  U., 
31,  205  sqq. 

§  6    Waitz's 

Waitz,  as  in  the  bibliog.     Stubbs,  vol.  i,  251  sqq. 

Professor  Waitz,  perhaps  the  ablest  authority  living 
or  dead  upon  the  question,  defends  a  view  congruent 
partly  with  Roth's,  partly  with  the  old.  He  emphati- 
cally agrees  with  Roth  in  regarding  the  Merovingian  a 
true  political  state,  yet  discovers  in  it  already  wide  prev- 
alence of  the  comitatus.  This  institution,  he  says,  no- 
wise forms  the  basis  of  the  Merovingian  government,1 
at  first  has  no  proper  political  significance  whatever, 
and  is  not  closely  related  to  grants  of  royal  land.  These 
grants  themselves,  however  this  especially  the  case 
among  the  Franks,  owing  to  the  vastness  of  royal  do- 
mains in  Gaul,  early  acquire  significance.  Recipients 
do  not,  to  be  sure,  become  vassals  in  the  crisp  sense  of 
later  law,  yet  form  somehow  a  special  class,  bound  to 
unique  fidelity  toward  the  king.2  Churches  and  rich 
individuals  also  convey  lands  in  similar  fief-like  fashion. 
Even  in  these  cases,  while,  of  course,  totally  irrelated  to 
the  comitatus,3  some  promise  of  protection  is  generally 
understood  to  accompany  the  grant.  Naturally  there- 
fore, the  vassal-benefice,  including  by  and  by  the  honor 
and  the  immunity,4  becomes  by  degrees  connected  in 


I84  FEUDALISM   AND    THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY 

both  thought  and  fact  with  the  mere-benefice.  More 
important,  all  these  relations,  at  first  purely  private  — 
here  too  Roth  is  right  —  press,  in  consequence  of  un- 
clearness  in  political  conception,  little  by  little,  even 
under  the  first  house,  into  the  realm  of  public  law,  and 
at  last,  in  late  Carolingian  time,  wholly  abolish  the  dis- 
tinct existence  of  this,  merging  it  with  private. 

1  Ct.  Naudet's  view,  §  5,  n.  2. 

2  This,  it  will  be  seen,  is  W.'s  chief  point  of  difference  from  Roth.  He 
is  also  clearly  correct  as  against  Roth  and  Sohm  in  insisting  upon  the  in- 
definiteness  of  Merovingian  legal  and  political  conceptions  and  the  gradual 
character  of  the  development  of  institutions  under  the  first  two  dynasties. 
To  apply  the  strict  conceptions  of  modern  law  to  Merovingian  jurispru- 
dence implies  great  lack  of  the  historical  spirit. 

8  Perhaps  even  of  Celtic  origin,  though  by  the  time  in  question  common 
among  Germans. 

4  An  '  immunity '  was  a  relief  from  any  public  burden,  as  from  a  tax  or 
a  count's  jurisdiction.  The  custom  of  granting  such  came  from  Roman 
times.  '  Honor '  meant  the  enjoyment  of  any  positive  public  privilege  or 
income,  whether  by  a  public  officer,  the  usual  case,  or  by  another.  Most 
honors  involved  immunity,  but  not  vice  versa.  Naturally  honors  and  im- 
munities were  often  confounded. 


§  7    Tenures  of  Land 

Secretan,  375-424. 

Till  Capet's  time,  tributary,  allodial,  and  beneficiary 
lands  have  to  be  distinguished.  In  consequence  of  the 
conquest,  lands  remaining  in  possession  of  private  own- 
ers, probably  the  larger  part  of  all,  freed  now  from 
Roman,  came,  in  some  irregular  fashion,  under  Frankish 
tribute.  They  were  mainly  owned  by  wealthy  Romans, 
tilled  by  coloni.1  Next  most  extensive  then,  were  allo- 
dial lands,  '  allotted  '  in  fee  simple  to  antrustions  and  fol- 


FEUDALISM    AND    THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY  1 85 

lowers,2  by  kings  and  chiefs.  Nominally  untaxed,3  they 
were  really  subject  to  slight  charges,  viz.,  certain  gifts 
to  the  king  and  supplies  to  his  agents  and  guests. 
These  domains,  enormous  from  the  first,  and  for  a  long 
time  continually  enlarged  in  a  great  variety  of  ways, 
consisted  of  relatively  few  vast  estates,  daily  made  larger 
and  fewer  by  encroachments  of  powerful  possessors  and 
by  gifts  to  the  church.4  Still  its  theoretical  superiority 
continued  allodial  tenure  in  favor,5  the  number  of  these 
estates  considerable.  Such  possessorship  naturally  be- 
came at  length  a  mark  of  great,  almost  of  royal,  power. 
Lands  of  the  third  class,  beneficiary,  were  originally  the 
exception.  Benefices  varied  in  permanence,  some  revo- 
cable at  pleasure,  some  for  life,  etc.,  but  with  a  strong 
tendency,  in  the  end  victorious  everywhere,  to  become 
hereditary.  Of  highest  consequence  is  the  transition, 
beginning  early,  of  both  tributary  and  allodial  territory 
into  beneficiary,  due  to  :  i  Grants  of  fiefs,  to  swell  reti- 
nues and  reward  services,  made  by  powerful  allodial  pro- 
prietors from  their  own  domains.  2  Like  grants  for 
like  reasons  made  by  lawless  lords,  of  lands  wrested 
forcibly  from  others  :  tributary  or  royal  domains  or  the 
property  of  some  neighbor.  3  Voluntary  commendation, 
to  escape  such  and  other  spoliation,  an  act  by  which  a 
proprietor  in  fee  simple  transferred  to  a  stronger  his 
title,  immediately  receiving  back  his  lands  in  fief,  with 
guaranty  of  protection  and  usufruct.  The  practice  of 
commendation,  first  touching  personal  relations  alone, 
and  applied  to  lands  only  gradually,  at  length  became 
incredibly  common.  By  the  time  of  Charles  the  Bald, 
the  first  two  species  of  tenure  had  well-nigh  disap- 
peared. 


1 86    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

1  Tributary  lands  were  held  by  three  different  forms  of  tenure :  preca> 
riunt,  common  for  church  lands  [n.  4],  emphyteusis  [§  4,  n.  3],  and  cen~ 
sive.  Tributary  land  under  the  last  tenure  differed  little  from  a  benefice, 
and  '  censives '  were  often  described  and  treated  as  benefices  which  paid 
rent,  with  or  without  service. 

2  •  Antrustion '  was  only  a  special  name  for  a  member  of  the  king's 
comitatus.  Comites  of  the  great  nobles,  each  of  whom,  as  well  as  the  king, 
had  his  comitatus,  were  designated  by  some  other  title,  as  fideles  or  leudes. 
Allods  were  most  common  in  the  old  Burgundian  and  Visigothic  kingdoms, 
where  the  barbarians  divided  among  themselves  vast  private  lands.  —  Sec- 
retan,  398. 

8  This  was  the  sole  difference  between  these  lands  and  the  tributary. 
Louis  le  Debonaire  made  out  a  list  of  the  monasteries  which  '  owed  gifts, 
showing  that  these  were  after  all  a  virtual  tax.  But  these,  and  the  sup- 
plies, transportation,  and  even  military  service  demanded  of  allodial  holders, 
were  remains  of  the  regime  of  a  public  power  and  were  not  thought  of  as 
feudal  in  nature.  Even  ecclesiastical  lands  were  not  exempt  from  these 
burdens.  Such  allodial  obligations  were  naturally  little  insisted  on  when 
royalty  was  at  nadir. 

4  The  church  at  first  held  allodially,  but  might  let  lands  by  either  of  the 
tenures  mentioned  in  n.  1. 

6  So  much  so  that  in  Charles  the  Bald's  time  the  name  '  allod '  was 
given  to  fiefs  or  benefices.  At  a  later  date  a  precisely  contrary  diction 
comes  to  prevail,  and  the  few  remaining  allods  are  called,  in  Germany, 
'fiefs  of  the  sun'  \_Sonnenlehen\,  in  France,  'franc-fiefs?  St.  Louis's  Es- 
tablishments conceive  the  king  as  God's  fief-holder.     Martin,  IV,  307. 

§  8     Society 

Blanqui,  ch.  xiii.    Hallam,  ch.  ii,  pt.  ii.    Secretan,  185-276. 

Society  fell  into  classes  much,  but  not  exactly,  in 
agreement  with  varieties  of  relation  to  land.  Next  above 
slaves,  pure  serfs  of  the  glebe,1  belonging  partly  to  the 
old  population,  partly  to  the  new,  stood  a  considerable 
class  of  freedmen,  differing  in  degree  of  liberty  accord- 
ing to  mode  of  emancipation,  royal,  ecclesiastical  or  by 
charter,2  but  never  absolutely  free.     The   old   Roman 


FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY     1 87 

order  of  curials  or  simple  freemen,  momentarily  re- 
enforced  at  the  invasion,  by  Franks  not  in  the  comitatus- 
relation,  soon  perished,3  its  members  driven  by  the  stress 
of  the  times  and  also  by  law  to  the  act  of  commenda- 
tion. Freeman  like  freedman  must  have  patron.  Con- 
sequently, as  allodial  holders  grew  few,  the  great  bulk 
of  society  came  to  be  composed  of  such  as  held  in  some 
of  its  manifold  forms  the  relation  of  vassals.  These 
were  multiplied  by  the  same  influences  as  beneficiary 
lands.  Many  and  most  diverse  social  conditions  were 
thus  in  one  way  and  another  under  feudal  contract :  all 
ranks  from  serf  to  king,  royal  beneficiaries  and  ducal, 
beneficiaries  of  land,  of  office,4  of  service.  Great  office- 
fief-holders  vied  in  power  with  the  mightiest  allodial 
lords.  Vassals  5  had  vassals.  Mere  personal  vassalage 
even  to  the  king  was  not  hereditary,  and  involved  no 
exceptional  right  save  that  of  extra  Wehrgeld.  A  new 
nobility  indeed  rose  in  this  period,  but  it  grew  out  of 
land.  The  clergy,  feudal  too,  and  the  sole  bond  be- 
tween classes  and  nationalities,  still  formed  an  order  by 
itself.  All  its  members  were  revered,  the  higher  power- 
ful almost  beyond  limit.  The  character  of  bishops  and 
abbots  as  antrustions,  if  it  dulled,  did  not  kill,  their 
popular  sympathies,  while  it  incalculably  enhanced  their 
ability  to  shield  and  help  the  weak.  The  church  antago- 
nized the  spirit  of  caste  by  both  its  preaching  and  its 
polity.     A  serf  might  become  bishop  or  even  pope. 

1  Servi  terrae  included  coloni  as  well  as  slaves  proper,  difference  be- 
tween them  being  now  very  slight.  Cf.  Ch.  IV,  §  6,  n.  2,  also  Guizot,  Civ. 
in  Fr.,  Lect.  vii,  and  Leo,  Mittelalter,  vol.  i,  22  sqq.,  for  the  manner  in 
which  peasants  were  reduced  toward  slavery.  The  approach  of  coloni  to 
veritable  slavery  after  the  invasions  was  due  in  part  not  to  their  degrada- 


1 88    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

tion  but  to  the  fact  that  German  slavery  was  milder  than  Roman.  See 
Duruy,  234;  Thierry,  Tiers  Atat,  ch.  i;  Choiseul-Daillecourt,  Inf.  des 
Croisades,  sec.  i. 

2  Cf.  the  Roman  modes  of  manumission  in  Justinian's  time :  Institutes, 
bk.  i,  5.  Each  freedman  had  to  have  his  patron.  If  the  solemnity  of 
emancipation  occurred  before  the  king,  he  would  be  the  patron;  if  before 
the  church,  the  church;   if  by  the  master's  written  document,  he. 

8  They  were  degraded  or  prevented  from  rising  by  the  causes  exhibited 
at  Ch.  IV,  §§  5,  6,  and  notes.  Texts  from  the  transition  period  still  call '  free ' 
peasants  who  have  commended  themselves.  In  the  9th  century  a  man  with- 
out land  could  not  testify  against  a  free  man,  but  could  aid  him  as  compurga- 
tor.    The  thought  was  that  testifying  was  part  of  judging.     Secretan,  193. 

4  As,  e.g.,  those  about  the  palace  and  the  king's  person.  The  terms 
'fief  and  'benefice'  at  first  applied  only  to  land,  but  gradually  came  to 
designate  also  all  sorts  of  functions,  immunities,  and  honors.  The  system 
was,  as  already  said,  based  on  land,  but  parts  of  it  were  at  some  remove 
from  the  basis.  For  the  power  of  the  constable  of  France,  Guizot,  Civ.  in 
Fr.,  vol.  iv,  13  sq.     On  bailiffs,  seneschals,  and  prevots,  §  16,  n.  4. 

6  The  word  '  baron '  had  several  senses,  the  generic,  of  '  freeman,'  the 
intermediate,  in  which  it  meant  '  feudal  seignior  in  general '  as  in  the 
phrase  '  the  barons  of  France,'  and  the  specific,  '  immediate  seigniors,' 
barons  par  excellence.  Synonyme  for  the  last  sense  was  '  sire.''  The  sires 
formed  but  a  small  class  of  all  who  could  be  called  barons.  '  Seignior ' 
and  '  suzerain '  bore  a  common  meaning,  being  alike  applicable  to  all  who 
had  vassals.  Obviously  the  same  man  might  be  in  different  relations  both 
vassal  and  suzerain  or  seignior.  Rear  vassals  or  '  va-vassals  '  were  vassals 
of  vassals.  Investiture  was  the  formal  act,  usually  with  ceremony  [§  13, 
n.  1],  by  which  a  suzerain  conferred  upon  his  vassal  the  possession  of 
land.  It  was  preceded  by  the  act  of  homage,  also,  when  they  were  sepa- 
rated, by  that  of  fidelity. 

6  I.e.,  antrustions  and  other  personal  vassals  did  not,  as  such,  form  a 
nobility. 

§  9     Feudalism  Victorious 

Guizot,  Civilization  in  France,  xxiv  and  xxv.     Duruy,  172  sqq.     Secretan,  82-110. 
Hallam,  ch.  ii.,  pt.  1.    Student's  France,  bk.  iii. 

Free  institutions,  Frankish  as  well  as  Roman,1  per- 
ished in  early  Merovingian  times,  and  in  the  contest 
now  joined  between  royalty  and  aristocracy,  everything 


FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY     1 89 

conspired  to  aid  the  latter.  Martell  found  royal  offices 
already  viewed  not  as  mobile,  hitherto  the  case,  but  as 
ranks  and  property,  and  in  process  of  becoming  heredi- 
tary. So  soon  as  the  marvellously  centralized  though 
merely  personal  government  of  Karl  the  Great  was  past, 
these  tendencies  swept  all  before  them.  It  is  noticea- 
ble that  the  chief  agents  of  decentralization  were  pre- 
cisely the  functionaries  nominally  representing  the  cen- 
tral government  itself.  To  explain  these  results  it  is 
not  sufficient,  though  necessary,  to  recall  general  causes. 
Also  we  must  look  beyond  the  weakness  of  later  Caro- 
lingians  and  the  size  of  their  empire.  1  The  practice 
of  hereditary  office,  first  obtaining  the  force  of  law, 
made  itself  law.  2  The  very  excellence  of  Karl's  gov- 
ernment aided  the  disintegrating  process  by  the  respect 
it  procured  for  the  officers  supposed  to  represent  it.2 
3  Their  immense  private  ownership  and  numerous  vas- 
sals in  the  districts  they  administered,  inducing  con- 
fusion between  their  two  kinds  of  power,  caused  the 
separate  legal  characters  of  these  to  be  ignored  and 
forgotten.  4  Unprecedented  attacks  of  Avars,  Nor- 
mans and  Saracens  forced  kings  to  appeal  to  their  great 
feudatories  for  aid,  to  be  had  only  by  concessions. 
Castles  now  built  against  Normans  enabled  their  insub- 
ordinate possessors  to  defy  kings.  A  similar  process 
affected  subordinate  principalities.  Princes,  pressed  by 
private  wars  for  greater  aid  from  vassals,  were  com- 
pelled to  yield  them  larger  privileges.  5  Ecclesiastical 
assumption,  asserting  the  pope's  right  to  judge  royal 
acts  and  even  depose  kings,  while  helpful  to  freedom  in 
the  first  instance,  wrought  mightily  to  the  pulling  down 
of  central  power. 


I90  FEUDALISM    AND    THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY 

1  Cf.  Ch.  IV,  §§  5,  14,  15  [esp.  n.  3].  From  Roman  institutions  all 
but  the  form  of  freedom  had  departed  before  the  5th  century,  but  the 
municipium  may  be  said  to  have  retained  the  form. 

2  '  It  is  found  that  when  an  official  appointed  by  a  powerful  government 
acts  upon  the  lower  constitution  of  a  primitive  society,  he  crushes  down 
all  other  classes  and  exalts  that  to  which  he  himself  belongs.'  —  Maine, 
V.  C,  151.  This  the  incipient  feudal  chiefs  did  when  still  in  name  agents 
of  their  government.  The  size  of  the  empire  augmented  the  evil,  as  was 
the  case  in  the  old- Roman.  Karl  Great  even  could  not  wholly  overcome 
this. 

§  10    Capetian  Reaction 

Stubbs,  ch.  i.  Hallam,  ch.  i,  pt.  i.  Duruy,  198-204,  469  sqq.  Secretan,  T15-140. 
Student's  France,  bk.  iv.  Kitchin,  vol.  i,  bks.  iii,  iv.  Ranke,  Civil  Wars  and  Mon- 
archy in  Fr.,  bk.  i.     Guizot,  2d  course,  xii. 

After  Karl  the  Great  the  old,  half-national  ducal  sys- 
tem, never  really  dead,  rose  again  to  power.  The  prin- 
cipalities of  France,  Aquitaine,  Bretagne,  Bourgogne, 
Normandie,  Flandre  and  Champagne  became  as  good 
as  separate  states.1  Only  the  fear  of  German  imperial 
designs,  especially  threatening  under  Otho  I,  kept  the 
French  kingship  in  being.  When  Hugh  Capet,  on  the 
death  of  Louis  V,  elected  by  his  chief  peers,  and  favored 
by  pope  and  clergy  and  by  his  own  power  and  central 
position  as  Duke  of  France,  proclaimed  himself  king, 
his  de  facto  power  increased  but  slightly  and  only  in 
two  ways.  There  were  transferred  to  him  (1)  the  ascrip- 
tion, not  yet  quite  nominal,  of  public  authority,  and  (2) 
the  admitted  if  not  efficient  right  of  regulating  the  royal 
benefices.  The  theory  that  allowed  fealty  to  a  king, 
and  looked  to  him  for  the  maintenance  of  order  and  the 
protection  of  the  weak,  still  lived.  For  all  this  Capet 
was  only  one,  and  not  the  strongest,  among  the  dukes2 
who  bore  and  were  trying  to  realize  the  royal  title. 
North,  South  and  West  ignored  him.     Two  centuries 


FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY     IQJ 

failed  to  crown  with  success  the  struggle  which  he  be- 
gun, and  it  must  have  been  hopeless  but  for  the  fact 
that  the  dominions  of  his  peers  were  as  yet  nowise  fully 
organized  feudally.  Princes'  pretensions  were  far  in 
advance  of  their  admitted  rights.  Hierarchy  was  imper- 
fect :  seigniors  who  were  not  peers  claimed  and  largely 
maintained  independence,  often  fighting  for  the  king 
against  the  peers  demanding  their  allegiance.  Yet  the 
struggle  could  not  but  be  long,  since  the  rivals  of  the 
new  king,  hampered  as  they  were,  had  immense  power. 
In  all  but  name  they  were  sovereign,  no  authority  above, 
no  tax,  no  obligation  to  military  service.  Nothing  but 
the  inherent  weakness  of  the  feudal  system,  coupled 
with  the  persistence  of  the  new  dynasty  in  the  at  first 
dim,  abstract,  intangible  idea  of  a  general  public  power 
as  necessary  and  right,  could  have  restored  to  France  a 
centralized  government. 

1  Their  princes,  '  peers  of  the  king,'  '  peers  of  France,'  called  themselves 
dukes  and  counts  '  by  the  grace  of  God.'  At  the  beginning  of  the  feudal 
epoch  the  princedom  is  no  more  than  monarchy  itself  a  feudal  affair.  It 
does  not  relate  to  land.  Princes  as  such  are  not  yet  the  feudal  suzerains 
of  the  other  land-holders  in  their  borders,  any  more  than  the  king  is  the 
feudal  suzerain  of  either.  I.e.,  each  princedom  contained  many  [feudally] 
independent  barons.  The  evolution  of  these  political  overlordships  into  a 
proper  feudal  character  was  very  slow.  —  Secretan,  116  sq.  When  in  the 
nth  and  I2th  centuries  the  peerage  was  brought  under  rule,  there  were 
six  lay  peers  of  France :  the  dukes  of  Bourgogne,  Normandie  and  Aqui- 
taine,  and  the  counts  of  Flandre,  Champagne  and  Toulouse;  and  six  eccle- 
siastical :  the  ducal  archbishop  of  Rheims,  the  ducal  bishops  of  Laon  and 
Langres,  and  the  count-bishops  of  Beauvais,  Chalons  and  Noyon.  These 
were  the  same  lay  princes  as  bore  this  relation  at  Capet's  accession.  The 
ecclesiastics  were  recognized  as  princes  in  the  12th  century. 

2  At  Capet's  coup  d'etat,  987,  150  lords  in  France  coined  money.  A 
smaller,  but  very  large,  number  waged  perpetual  [private]  wars,  like  sov- 
ereigns, refusing   to   take   law   from   any  superior.     The   capitularies  of 


I92  FEUDALISM    AND   THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY 

Charles  the  Simple,  early  in  the  loth  century,  were  the  last  utterances  of 
properly  public  legislation. 

§  11     Feudalism     How  far  a  System 

Guirard,  as  in  bibliog.    Secretan,  195-230.    Duruy,  202  sqq.    Guizot,  2d  course,  iv,  v. 

Feudalism,  to  be  studied  at  its  most  perfect  stage,  has 
to  be  seized  while  the  Capetian  family  is  in  mid-struggle. 
Earlier  the  system  is  not  developed,  later  when  mon- 
archy has  become  an  essential  part  of  it  it  turns  political, 
ceases  to  be  feudal.  So  soon  as  military  service  to  the 
state  is  established,  and  the  rights  of  all,  with  the  duties 
of  all,  even  of  the  highest  lords  themselves,  are  pro- 
nounced upon  and  enforced  by  a  central  and  supreme 
authority,  essential  feudalism  is  no  longer  present.  At 
its  apogee  feudalism  presents  a  confederation  of  petty 
sovereigns,  despots,  with  arbitrary  and  absolute  power 
over  their  subjects,  very  loosely  united  by  a  certain  com- 
munity of  interest  and  by  at  least  theoretical  allegiance 
to  the  same  king.  Each  of  these  princes  forms  the  apex 
to  a  hierarchy  of  ranks,  two  of  them,  under  seigniors1 
and  knights,  free  like  himself,  the  third,  or  roturiers^  in 
actual  serfdom  though  in  part  nominally  free.  Duties 
and  rights  subsisted  only  between  proximate  ranks,  the 
theoretical  freedom  of  a  low  vassal  to  appeal  to  his 
suzerain  of  the  second  degree  being  rarely  used,  more 
rarely  of  avail.  All  administrative  and  judicial  offices, 
all  public  employments,  privileges  of  every  kind  had 
assumed  the  character  of  fiefs.  Yet  the  system  of  feu- 
dalism was  even  now  by  no  means  perfect.  There  were 
still  allodial  proprietors  outside  it,  some  cities  especially 
in  South  France  retained  franchises,3  degrees  of  free- 
dom in  the  rotourier  class  were  various.    A  prince  might 


FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY     I93 

infeud  himself  to  his  peer,  or  infeud  that  peer's  vassal, 
or  both.  Cases  occurred  of  princes  that  were  vassals 
of  their  own  vassals.  Even  the  king  of  France  was  for 
certain  lands  a  vassal  to  his  own  subjects.  Fidelity,  at 
first  perfectly  distinct  from  homage,  had  become  insep- 
arably merged  therewith.4  Such  confusion  inevitably 
wrought  extensive  blending  of  ranks,  and  aided  royalty 
by  making  evident  and  felt  the  need  of  a  new  govern- 
mental organization. 

1  Or  rear  vassals.  A  knight  might  or  might  not  hold  a  land-fief.  If  he 
did,  he  was  in  the  feudal  hierarchy  of  course.  But  even  if  he  did  not  pos- 
sess land,  he  was  '  the  man '  of  him  who  had  dubbed  him  knight.  For  the 
nature  of  this  ceremony,  so  similar  to  the  ancient  Teutonic  rite  of  receiving 
a  new  comes  by  a  chief,  see  Secretan,  209;  Guizot,  Civ.  in  Fr.,  vol.  iv, 
20  sqq.  Secretan,  210  sq.,  against  Guizot,  believes  knighthood  to  be  of 
Spanish- Arabian  origin.  He  derives  'galant'  from  the  Celtic  ' galawn  '=• 
brave.  Vassals  of  one  and  the  same  degree  of  infeudation  might  of  course 
differ  much  in  the  extent  and  character  of  their  fiefs.  There  were  among 
the  rear  vassals,  counts  and  viscounts  as  well  as  mere  seigniors.  Bishops 
and  abbots  as  temporal  potentates  also  held  this  relation.  Sub-in feudation 
did  not  require  the  suzerain's  consent.  Also,  in  spite  of  the  salic  law :  de 
terra  salica  in  mulierem  nulla  portio  transit  sed  hoc  virilis  sexus  acquirit, 
many  females  in  France  inherited  fiefs,  and  in  Germany  female  heirs  always 
did  so  as  against  males  more  remote  in  blood.  In  Brittany  this  usage 
originated  the  term  'homesse'  as  title  for  a  female  vassal.  The  salic  law 
referred  in  fact  only  to  allodial  estates,  not  to  fiefs,  least  of  all  to  the  royal 
succession,  as  pleaded  by  Philip  VI  of  Valois,  in  1328,  against  Edward  III 
of  England  [Hallam,  ch.  i,  pt.  1].  As  to  the  word  'salic,'  Guerard  has  as 
good  as  proved  that  it  is  from  'sala,'  the  seignior's  house,  terra  salica 
meaning  the  '  home  estate.'  So  Grimm,  Eichhorn  and  Mittermeyer,  but 
not  Guizot,  who  holds  to  the  old  view  connecting  'salic'  with  'sal'  =  the 
sea,  and  the  '  Salian  '  Franks.  But  salic  land  is  much  oftener  mentioned 
in  connection  with  other  peoples  than  with  the  Salian  Franks.  It  may 
have  meant  the  entire  estate  or  merely  so  much  as  had  not  been  let  out  to 
coloni.  Secretan,  405,  takes  it  to  include  the  whole,  like  the  haereditas 
aviatica  of  the  Ripuarian  Franks.  Cf.  Hallam,  note  iii  to  ch.  ii;  Martin, 
vol.  iv,  bk.  xxviii  [a  very  full  and  able  discussion]. 


194    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

2  Immediately  after  the  invasion  there  was  a  class  of  Teutonic  poo* 
the  liti,  parallel  and  similar  to  the  coloni,  both  these  being  superior  to 
slaves.  By  the  nth  century  liti  and  coloni  are  no  longer  distinguished, 
and  the  difference  between  them  and  slaves  has  become  slight.  This 
partly  by  elevation  of  the  slaves.  They  are  now  serfs,  bound  to  the  soil, 
rather  than  mere  personal  chattels  as  once.  This  betterment  came  mostly 
through  the  influence  of  the  church  [ch.  iii,  §  16,  n.  3],  partly  by  the  opera- 
tion of  the  Roman  law  rule  parttts  sequitur  ventrem  in  determining  per- 
sons' status  as  bond  or  free.  Women  oftener  than  men  married  beneath 
them.  '  Villains '  were  in  regular  feudal  times  on  nearly  the  same  level 
with  serfs,  but  the  name  usually  denotes  non-agricultural  roturiers,  as  the 
people  about  the  castle,  villa  or  village.  Villains  are  thus  more  closely 
related  than  serfs  to  the  bourgeois,  town-folk,  or  third  estate.  Cf.  Guizot, 
Lect.  vii,  viii,  2d  course.  '  Roturier '  is,  according  to  Du  Cange,  from  rup- 
tuarius  —  a  peasant,  and  this  from  agrum  rumpere,  to  break  the  soil. 

8  Were  not,  that  is,  subject  to  any  neighboring  feudal  lord  but  to  the 
king  alone;  i.e.,  in  effect  independent.  Notice  how  Roman  law  influences 
there  kept  feudalism  from  attaining  the  power  in  South  France  which  it 
had  in  North.  Not  only  allods  still  remained,  but  there  were  waste  lands, 
theoretically  the  king's,  practically  res  nullius. 

4  For  the  relation  of  fealty,  or  fidelity,  to  homage,  §  1,  n.  1 ;  also  §  8, 
n.  5.  For  the  kindred  distinction  between  a  'justice  '-fief  and  a  fief  proper 
or  land-fief,  Secretan,  437  sqq. 

§  12     Defects  and  Merits 

Guizot,  2d  course,  iv.       Duruy,  237  sqq.     Hallam,  ch.  ii,  pt.  ii. 

As  a  form  of  government,  feudalism  was  about  the 
worst  possible.  Its  principle  of  subordination  could  not 
be  enforced  :  disquiet,  wars,  insecurity  were  terrible  and 
continual.  What  order  the  system  did  succeed  in  evok- 
ing was  more  dearly  bought  than  under  other  types  of 
despotism.  The  little  but  officious  sovereign,  so  near, 
perpetually  reminded  his  subjects  of  their  condition, 
while  their  paucity  delivered  him  from  the  necessity  of 
governing  by  general  rules.  Personal  government  here 
developed  its  least  worthy  species,  the  prince  depending 


FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY     I95 

on  force  instead  of  law,  ignorant,  wilful  and  cut  off  by 
the  system  from  all  natural  or  competent  advisers.  Nor 
were  these  evils,  as  in  many  historical  despotisms,  as- 
suaged by  a  stately  mechanism  or  an  evident  high  mis- 
sion of  the  government,  suggesting  divine  ordination. 
It  cannot  be  said  that  feudalism  inherited  all  these  ills  : 
it  aggravated  most  that  it  received,  engendered  new 
from  its  own  bosom.  But  we  may  admit  that  it :  i  In 
efforts  toward  public  order  had  society  and  the  times 
against  it.1  2  Somewhat  ameliorated  the  condition  of 
mere  serfs.2  3  Through  its  aristocratic  form  of  tenure, 
favored  the  subjugation  of  lands  and  the  introduction  of 
improved  agricultural  methods  more  than  a  freer  system 
could  then  have  done.3  4  Greatly  furthered  sentiments 
of  chivalry,  such  as  honor,  fealty  to  superiors  and  the 
exaltation  of  woman.4  5  Was  a  main  source  of  the 
ideas  of  self-dependence,  personal  dignity  and  regard  for 
personal  liberty,5  as  these  appear  in  modern  govern- 
ments and  life.  6  Greatly  aided  through  its  cultivation, 
direct  and  indirect,  of  these  ideas,  to  effect  first  the 
birth  then  the  enfranchisement  of  that  third  estate8 
which  the  Roman  empire  had  annihilated  and  by  the 
aid  of  which  alone  the  Capetian  kings  were  enabled  to 
recreate  government  in  the  proper  political  sense,  public 
and  centralized. 
2Cf.  §3. 

2  Feudalism  herein  merely  concurred  with  other  causes,  religion  and 
the  growth  of  men's  knowledge  of  men.  It  acted  partly  by  the  promi- 
nence it  gave  to  the  principle  of  land,  making  the  slave  an  adscriptus 
glebae  [§  8,  n.  i]  instead  of  a  personal  chattel,  and  partly  by  its  continual 
exhibition  of  free  men  contending  for  their  freedom  as  a  precious  thing. 

8  So  Inama-Sternegg,  also  Maine,  V.  C,  162.  Possessors  of  land  en« 
forced  drainage,  clearing  and  the  like. 


I96    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

*  Weber,  WettgescA.,1,757;  Symonds,  Age  of  the  Despots,  vii;  Hallam, 
ch.  ii;  Duruy,  239  sqq.;  Secretan,  210  sqq.  Feudal  law,  herein  according 
with  both  Roman  law  and  Teutonic  custom,  kept  woman  under  tutelage, 
yet  treating  her  less  and  less  as  a  chattel.  The  establishments  of  Nor- 
mandy alone  among  feudal  codes  declare  that  '  no  woman  has  response  in 
a  laic  court.'  The  nobles,  forced  to  be  much  at  home,  cultivated  and 
came  to  enjoy  the  society  of  their  wives  and  children.  In  turn  this  devel- 
oped female  character.  But  much  was  now  doing  aside  from  feudalism  or 
chivalry  to  ennoble  the  individual  and  to  heighten  esteem  for  woman.  In 
the  latter  regard,  worship  of  the  Virgin  had  great  effect.  Throughout 
these  rude  centuries  the  church  stood  nobly,  on  the  whole,  for  freedom. 
Serfs  became  priests,  might  mount  the  papal  throne  itself. 

5  All  feudal  life  displayed  these.  Even  feudalism's  worst  evils,  its 
anarchy  and  private  wars,  had  thus  their  saving  aspect.  See  Kitchin, 
vol.  1,  bk.  iii,  ch.  iv,  also  Mills  and  Clark,  as  in  bibliog. 

6  See  §  16. 

§  13     German  Feudalism 

Secretan,  142-170.     Schulte,  Reichs-  u.  Rechtsgesch.,  144-287. 

This  differed  considerably  from  French.  It  was  far 
less  homogeneous,  embracing  three  forms  of  subordina- 
tion which  remained  to  the  last  legally  distinct,  here 
mentioned  in  an  order  exactly  the  reverse  of  that  of 
their  origination :  i  Lehnrecht,  public  feudalism  or  feu- 
dalism proper.1  Strictly  the  terms  feudam,  vassal  and 
Lehnsmann  relate  to  this  alone.  Here  we  have  a  con- 
tract truly  feudal,  and  a  system  somewhat  like  the 
French.  2  Schutzrecht,  quasi-feudalism,  the  relation  be- 
tween the  freeman  too  poor  to  equip  a  horse  for  war, 
and  the  duke  or  count  whom  he  paid  to  represent 
him.  This  sort  of  arrangement  began  under  Henry  the 
Fowler2  during  the  Avar  wars,  and  made  itself  perma- 
nent. 3  HofrecJit,  or  private  feudalism,  the  continuation 
of  the  old  comitatus-relation.  Vassals  of  this  species, 
called  ministerials,  were  of  very  various  conditions,  form- 


FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY     1 97 

ing  two  great  classes,  the  non-military,  who  fell  to  the 
rank  of  serfs  or  half-serfs,  and  the  military,  who  were 
free,  and  many  of  whom  became  knights,  superior  in 
rank  to  men  under  Schutzrecht.  Indeed  the  distinction 
between  military  ministerials  and  vassals  proper  grew 
to  be  in  time  mostly  nominal.  But  even  the  public 
feudalism  of  Germany  had  features  of  strong  contrast 
with  the  French.  The  great  immediate  fief-holders  here 
never  bore  to  the  king,  which  was  finally  the  case  in 
France,  the  same  relation  as  vassals  upon  the  royal 
domains.  Other  peculiarities  of  the  institution  in  Ger- 
many were  the  legal  and  regular  manner  of  its  introduc- 
tion and  its  connection  with  royalty.  Here  royalty  in- 
troduced feudalism,  and  was,  as  to  its  power,  annihilated 
by  the  same,  while  in  France  feudalism  introduced  a 
royal  line  at  whose  hands  itself  perished.  Note  too  the 
late  origin  of  German  feudalism  proper,  at  the  close  of 
the  Carolingian  period. 

1  German  feudal  law  allowed  various  forms  of  investiture,  correspond- 
ing to  the  various  symbols  which  stood  for  the  different  classes  of  fiefs. 
Lay  fiefs  of  the  first  class  [immediate]  were  symbolized  by  the  flag 
\_Fahne\  and  hence  called  Fahnlehen,  ecclesiastical  fiefs  of  this  class  by 
the  sceptre,  lay  rear-fiefs  by  the  gauntlet,  ecclesiastical  by  the  key.  —  Secre- 
tan,  311. 

2  See  Ch.  V,  §  7. 

3  A  fief  under  Hofrecht  was  called  a  ' Dienstlehen'  one  under  Lehn- 
recht  a  '  Rechtslehen?  a  rear-fief  an  '  Afterlehen '  [Latin,  '  snbfeudum '] . 

§  14     Italian 

Secretan,  171-185.  Hallam,  ch.  i,  pt.  i,  ch.  iii.  Duruy,  ch.  xxix.  Weber,  Welt- 
gesch.,  I,  699  sqq.  Symonds,  Age  of  the  Despots.  Burckhardt,  Renaissance  in 
Italy,  pt.  1. 

In  Italy '  feudalism  had  no  special  internal  peculiarity 
but  suffered   decided  modifications  from   other  institu- 


I98  FEUDALISM    AND    THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY 

tions,  viz.  the  church  and  the  communes.  The  con- 
quest by  Karl  the  Great  changed  Italian  feudalism  in 
no  essential,  except  to  give  extraordinary  place  in  it  to 
immunities  and  honors,  which  the  Franks  introduced 
here  just  as  they  were  turning  hereditary.  By  eccle- 
siastical immunities  especially,  Otho  I  sought  to  coun- 
tervail and  humble  the  Italian  counts  in  their  struggle 
for  independence.  The  power  thus  obtained  by  bishops 
in  and  about  their  towns,  while  it  was  the  germ  of 
municipal  liberties,  soon  raised  up  a  new  class  of  tyrants 
and  rebels,  more  dangerous  to  imperial  pretensions  than 
the  first.  Hence  we  see  in  Italy  the  rare  spectacle  of 
emperors  earnestly  strengthening  their  lay  vassals  2  as  a 
check  to  the  capitani  or  heads  of  the  great  episcopal 
families.  Conrad  the  Salian  and  his  son,  Henry  III, 
went  farthest  in  this  policy.  Cities  too  were  now 
favored  as  against  the  bishops,  both  by  the  emperor 
and  by  feudal  nobles.  The  might  of  the  communes, 
thus  fostered  first  under  episcopal  preeminence  then 
by  imperial  and  feudal  patronage,  became  at  the  open- 
ing of  the  Hohenstaufen  period  invincible.  They  quite 
eclipse  in  splendor  and  power  all  but  a  few  of  the  feu- 
dal aristocrats,  many  of  whom  seek  alliances  with  them. 
Numerous  cities  of  the  twelfth  century,  having  acquired 
the  corpora  sancta  of  their  bishops,  swayed  territories 
larger  than  counties.  Several  made  other  cities  tribu- 
tary. Many  on  the  other  hand  accepted  the  protection 
and  the  rule  of  neighboring  barons.  The  communes 
were  hence  as  impotent  as  feudalism  to  give  Italy  a 
governmental  system.  Destitute  of  union  except  so 
long  as  forced  to  this  by  imperial  persecution,  those 
which  secured  their  liberties  were  not   able  to   guard 


FEUDALISM    AND   THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY  1 99 

them,  and  fell  prey  to  tyrants,  who,  however,  were  not 
feudal.3  No  other  land  in  feudal  times  promised  free- 
dom as  did  Italy,  none  has  enjoyed  it  so  little. 

1  By  Italy  here  North  Italy  is  of  course  meant :  in  the  South  feudalism 
had  much  more  of  its  Norman  completeness.     Cf.  §§  I,  2. 

2  Making  them  hereditary,  e.g. 

3  But  pure  upstarts,  like  those  of  ancient  Greece.  See  Burckhardt, 
Renaissance,  and  Symonds,  Age  of  the  Despots,  esp.  ch.  ii.  A  few,  how- 
ever, rose  in  part  by  the  aid  of  real  or  alleged  feudal  right,  or  of  imperial 
office,  and  were  hence  somewhat  more  tolerable  than  the  lawless  condot- 
tieri  like  Guarnieri,  whose  corslet  bore  the  legend :  '  Enemy  of  God, 
of  Pity  and  of  Mercy ';  or  Doge  Agnello  of  Pisa,  whose  servants  waited  on 
him  on  their  knees;  or  Giangaleazzo  of  Milan,  who  quartered  5000  boar- 
hounds  on  his  peasants;  or  his  son,  Giovan  Maria,  who  used  hounds  for 
his  bodyguard,  feeding  them  no  flesh  but  human,  which  he  enjoyed  seeing 
them  tear  from  living  subjects. 

§  15     English 

Stubbs,  chaps,  i-vii;  cf.  his  Select  Charters,  pt.  i.  Hallam,  ch.  viii.  Gneist,  Eng. 
Constitution,  ch.  i.  Freeman,  Growth  of  do.,  740  sqq.;  Norman  Conquest,  ch.  iii. 
Green,  H.  of  Eng.  People,  bk.  ii. 

The  Normans  found  England  already  in  process  of 
becoming  feudal.  The  old  system1  of  holding  lands 
community-wise  had  been  introduced  by  the  Saxons  into 
England  only  in  part.  The  folclands2  and  the  common 
holdings  of  Saxon  townships  were  traces  of  it,  but  the 
rule  was  individual  possession.  This  gravitated  toward 
feudalism  through  the  influence  of  the  comitatus.  As 
in  early  France,  victorious  leaders  parcelled  out  con- 
quered districts  among  their  followers,  to  which  addi- 
tions from  the  folclands  were  made  from  time  to  time 
to  reward  old  retainers  or  win  new.  Only,  in  Saxon 
England,  the  tie  between  landholders  and  their  supe- 
riors was  to  the  very  Conquest  at  bottom  personal  in- 
stead  of  properly  feudal.     The   landholder  owned   his 


200    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

land  in  fee  simple,  his  debt  of  military  service  being  re- 
sult of  ownership,  not  condition  of  usufruct.  The  land- 
less were  obliged  to  have  patrons  but  might  elect  and 
change  these.  Of  course  the  distinction  between  this 
and  a  feudal  system  was  not  obvious,  and  several  things 
increased  the  resemblance  :  I  Unity  of  the  kingdom  in- 
stituted at  once  a  perfect  hierarchy  of  relations,  from 
the  king  downward  to  all  recipients  of  folcland  and  their 
dependents.  2  Every  possessor  of  folcland  had  juris- 
diction throughout  his  territory.  3  Commendation  by 
allodial  holders  was  frequent,  especially  during  the 
Danish  wars.  4  '  Heriots '  resembled  reliefs.3  Yet  in 
spite  of  these  feudal  features  the  essence  of  feudalism, 
at  least  as  to  central  tenure  of  land,  was  not  yet  present. 
It  came  only  with  the  Conquest.  Vast  numbers  of 
Norman  landholders  were  then  substituted  for  Saxon, 
and  in  all  other  cases  the  above  relations  speedily  came 
to  be  construed  silently  according  to  Norman  feudal  law, 
England  being  saved  from  the  thorough-going  feudal 
system  of  Normandy  only  by  the  sturdy  and  enlightened 
royal  ambition  of  the  Conqueror  and  his  successors, 
which  preserved  the  Norman-English  kingship  as  an 
efficient  central  power,  public,  not  feudal,  in  character.4 

1  See  Ch.  IV,  §  9,  n.  2. 

3  I.e..  public  lands,  the  very  name  indicating  that  commons  and  waste 
patches  belonged  to  the  folk,  not  to  the  king. 

3  For  the  nature  of  the  •  relief,'  §  4,  n.  I.  The  heriot,  like  the  relief, 
was  some  piece  of  property  or  symbol  thereof  sent  from  among  the  effects 
of  a  deceased  vassal  to  that  vassal's  lord,  but  with  the  difference  that  the 
heriot  looked  to  the  past,  as  a  restoration  of  loaned  property,  while  the 
relief  regarded  the  future,  being  a  sort  of  fee  in  a  suit  for  re-grant  of  land. 
Heriots  purported  to  proceed  from  dead  vassals,  reliefs  from  the  heirs  of 
such. 


FEUDALISM   AND   THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY  201 

4  The  Norman-English  feudal  constitution  proceeded,  like  the  German, 
from  the  king,  instead  of  being  prepared  for  him  as  in  France.  William 
and  his  successors  continued  to  govern  by  sheriffs  and  militia,  as  the  Saxon 
kings  had.  All  landholders  of  consequence  were  made  their  immediate 
vassals.  The  fiefs  of  all  the  great  vassals  were  assigned  in  numerous 
widely  separated  pieces  and  localities.  Rear  vassals,  like  their  suzerains 
had  to  swear  allegiance  to  king  directly.  The  new  line  became  kings 
theoretically  not  by  conquest  but  as  heirs  of  Edward,  hence  as  kings  of 
Saxons,  of  the  whole  people,  not  merely  of  their  Norman  fief-holders. 
Under  this  plea  they  were  able  to  conserve  whatever  of  Saxon  things  favored 
royal  power  as  against  the  barons.  In  the  sequel,  this  adroit  fiction  told 
powerfully  for  English  liberty.  See  the  author's  Inst,  of  Constitutional 
Hist.,  I,  §§  9  sqq. 

§  16    Communes  and  the  Third  Estate 

Rev.  historique,  xxi,  91  sqq.  Guizot,  Civilization  in  Europe,  vii  [2d  course,  xvi-xix]. 
May,  Democracy  in  Europe,  chaps,  vii,  xii-xviii.  Blanc,  Revolution  Francaise, 
Liv.  II,  i. 

During  the  long  wrestle  of  the  French  king  with  his 
barons  rose  a  third  power,  the  people,  destined  to  final 
victory  over  both.  It  began  and  for  six  hundred  years 
served  as  an  ally  of  monarchy.  By  the  twelfth  century 
numerous  French  communes,  having  from  their  oppres- 
sion learned  to  love  and  defend  liberty,  were  after  strug- 
gles long  and  brave,  at  last  free,  with  elective  officers, 
high  justice1  and  their  own  legislation.  To  insure  them- 
selves against  their  old  feudal  masters  they  sought  rec- 
ognition and  charters  from  the  king  on  condition  of 
assisting  him  in  war.  It  was  by  their  contingents  that 
Philip  Augustus  conquered  at  Bouvines.2  Their  aid 
was  at  length  so  decisive  that  the  lords  too  were  glad  to 
purchase  it  by  larger  grants  of  liberty  and  immunity.3 
But  the  communes,  which  soon  sank  in  significance, 
opposed  feudalism  less  in  this  direct  manner  than  as 
cradles  of  a  new  and  incalculable  social  force,  the  third 


202     FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

estate.  The  cities  that  had  aided  the  king  to  his  inde- 
pendence 4  he  might  rob  wholly  or  partly  of  theirs,  still 
the  burgher  spirit  remained  and  increased.  Most  royal 
officers,  as  bailiffs,  seneschals  and  preVots,  were  burghers, 
whose  numbers  and  power  as  well  as  many  of  their  spe- 
cific acts  wrought  to  exalt  their  class  and  depress  aris- 
tocracy. All  secular,  especially  all  legal,6  learning,  all 
technical  skill,  business  enterprise  and  administrative 
talent,  all  great  wealth  that  was  mobile,  and  in  particu- 
lar all  earnest  national  feeling6  belonged  to  the  third 
estate.  It  thus  became  the  leading  force  in  France's 
political  progress,  aiding  monarchy  to  first  place  as 
against  feudalism,  then  turning  against  the  two,  now 
united  to  fight  it,  and  thenceforth  never  lowering  its 
hand  till  constitutional  government  was  attained.7 

1  The  communes,  more  strictly  so-called,  were  the  towns  Mans  [the 
first]  Cambrai,  Beauvais,  Laon,  Amiens,  Rheims,  Etampes,  Vezelay,  and 
a  few  others,  which  forcibly  wrested  their  liberty  from  lords'  grasp,  high 
justice  and  all,  while  boroughs  or  villes  de  bourgeoisie  were  towns  which 
obtained  in  a  pacific  way  concessions  mostly  short  of  high  justice.  For- 
mally less  free  than  communes,  they  succeeded  better  in  retaining  what 
freedom  they  had.  Most  boroughs  were  of  mediaeval  origin,  but  the 
borough  franchise  is  found  to  have  belonged  to  many  cities,  like  Paris 
and  Orleans,  which,  though  ancient,  seem  not  to  have  kept  up,  as  did 
Marseilles,  Aries,  Nismes,  Narbonne  and  Toulouse,  the  Roman  municipal 
regime  [Ch.  Ill,  §  13,  n.  4].  Every  commune  had  what  was  called  high 
justice,  i.e.,  could  inflict  the  severest  fines  and  penalties.  Some  of  the 
boroughs  had  this  haute  justice,  others  only  the  moyenne  or  the  basse,  ac- 
cording to  the  terms  of  their  charters.  Feudal  lords  likewise  had  the 
haute,  moyenne  or  basse,  according  to  their  rank. 

2  In  1 2 14,  over  the  formidable  allied  armies  of  King  John  of  England 
and  the  Emperor  Otho  IV.  Contingents  from  16  French  towns  fought 
under  Philip's  banners.  His  opponents  also  had  burgher  forces  from  most 
of  the  Flemish  cities.  To  this  battle,  which  humbled  John,  England  is  in- 
debted for  the  Great  Charter. 


FEUDALISM    AND    THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY  203 

8  It  became  the  policy  of  many  great  feudatories  to  attract  peasants  to 
their  lands  by  forming  villages  with  special  privileges.  See  Duruy,  340, 
the  charter  given  by  Count  Henri  of  Troves  to  his  Villeneuve.  The 
charter  was  commonly  accompanied  by  a  code  of  laws,  '  customs,'  for  the 
inhabitants.  Giraud,  appendix  to  vol.  i,  has  an  interesting  collection  of 
these  charters  and  codes:  for  Strassburg,  Bigorre,  Sindelsberg,  Soest, 
Nieuport,  Medebach,  Montpellier,  Carcasonne,  Martel,  Albi,  Fumes,  Tou- 
louse and  Freiburg  in  Breisgau. 

4  There  were  of  course  many  ancillary  causes  of  this  Capetian  triumph 
over  feudal  aristocracy.  The  foremost  were  (1)  the  intrinsic  weakness  of 
feudalism  itself,  (2)  the  length  of  the  reigns  of  most  Capetian  kings, 
(3)  the  study  ot  Roman  law,  (4)  frequent  choice  by  vassals  of  the  king 
as  arbiter  in  their  quarrels,  (5)  the  favor,  of  the  Gallican  clergy,  partly 
out  of  fear  of  the  king,  partly  out  of  love  and  loyalty,  (6)  the  crusades, 
impoverishing  aristocracy,  deranging  its  constitution  and  disseminating  new 
ideas,  and  (7)  the  creation  of  an  order  of  royal  officers  in  the  proper, 
non-feudal  sense,  thoroughly  in  the  interests  of  the  crown :  those  bailiffs, 
seneschals  and  prevots  mentioned  in  the  text.  '  Bailiffs '  was  the  name  of 
these  missi  dominici  [for  such  they  essentially  were]  in  North  France, 
'seneschals'  in  the  South.  Prevots  were  officers  of  a  lower  grade,  admin- 
istrative and  judicial  in  function,  confined  to  the  provinces  directly  pos- 
sessed by  the  descendants  of  Hugh  Capet.  Most  of  the  king's  immediate 
feudatories,  following  his  example,  created  bailiffs,  or  seneschals,  and  pre- 
vots each  for  his  own  territory.  As  one  great  fief  after  another  became 
incorporated  in  the  royal  domain  the  local  legal  and  administrative  ma- 
chinery hence  adjusted  itself  easily  to  the  general.  Bastard  d'Estang, 
ch.  iii. 

5  Jurists  especially  were  third  estate  men.  They  carried  over  to  the 
king  of  France  the  ascriptions  of  authority  which  the  Roman  law  couples 
with  the  emperor.  St.  Louis  permitted  cities  of  South  France  to  use 
Roman  law  as  their  municipal  law. 

6  From  about  1 2 14,  date  of  the  battle  of  Bouvines,  not  before,  we  may 
speak  of  '  France'  as  a  political  unity,  and  can  detect  an  incipient  enthu- 
siasm for  France  as  a  nation  [see  next  §].  Aristocrats  have  often  had 
loyalty,  rarely  strong  patriotism.     This  is  emphatically  a  popular  virtue. 

7  Cf.  Ch.  X,  passim,  esp.  §  6. 


204   feudalism  and  the  french  monarchy 
§  17  Suger  and  Philip  Augustus 

Hallam,  ch.  i,  pt.  i.      Guizot,  2d  course,  xiii.    Kitchin,  vol.  i,  bk.  iii,  chaps.  ▼,  vi, 
vii.    Milntan,  IX,  iv.    Martin,  vols,  iii,  iv. 

While  the  Capetians  pursued  from  an  early  period  a 
political  policy,  their  progress  consisted  for  long  mainly 
in  the  increase  of  their  feudal  power  and  territory.  It 
was  slight  at  best.  In  spite  of  the  acquisition  of  Bur- 
gundy by  Robert,  Philip  I,  1 060-1108,  excommunicated 
by  the  pope '  and  at  war  with  William  the  Conqueror, 
saw  the  new  royalty  at  its  nadir,  the  duchy  of  France, 
which  was  the  substance  and  almost  the  whole  of  his 
kingdom,  reduced  to  five  counties,  between  which  inso- 
lent lords  disputed  his  passage.  From  this  time  the 
course  is  upward.2  That  march  of  political  monarchy 
in  France,  ending  in  the  absolutism  of  Louis  XIV, 
which  made  the  king  the  sole  judge,  administrator  and 
legislator  in  the  land,  began  with  Louis  the  Fat,  1108- 
'37.  This  able  monarch  attacked  insubordinate  nobles 
with  energy  and  success,  introducing  the  principle  of 
his  statesmanlike  minister  Suger,3  that  the  royal  power 
was  to  be  viewed  and  used  as  an  organ  of  public  order 
and  justice.  This  was  henceforth  a  settled  doctrine  of 
the  house.  Philip  Augustus  acted  upon  it  in  a  far 
larger  and  bolder  way  still.  He  refused  to  do  homage 
for  any  of  his  fiefs  whatever,4  attacked  by  the  quaran- 
taine-le-royh  the  right  of  private  war,  and  roused  the 
spirit  and  pride  of  nationality  by  successful  opposition 
to  the  nation's  foes  in  the  great  victory  of  Bouvines, 
where  French  patriotism  figured  for  the  first  time  in 
history.6  Further,  by  combined  fortune,  fraud,  force 
and  diplomacy,  Philip  wrested  from  John  the  possession 


FEUDALISM   AND   THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY  2C»5 

of  Normandy  and  the  suzerainty  of  Bretagne,  Poitou, 
Maine,  Touraine  and  Anjou,7  results  the  more  remark- 
able as,  shortly  before,  English  power  in  France,  so 
predominant,  seemed  on  the  point  of  absorbing  the 
French  kingdom  entire.  Lastly,  without  taking  part 
in  the  crusade  against  the  Albigenses,  he  inaugurated 
the  movement  whereby  that  crusade  was  to  result 8 
under  Saint  Louis,  in  the  addition  to  the  royal  domains, 
which  apart  from  this  Philip  had  doubled,  of  the  whole 
vast  territories  of  the  Counts  of  Toulouse. 

1  See  Ch.  V,  §  16,  n.  3.  Philip  was  ten  years  under  the  ban  and  then 
submitted.  Papal  intervention  in  this  case  was  honorable  and  its  effect 
beneficial.  William  the  Conqueror  corrupted  Philip's  feudatories  by  offer- 
ing them  lands  across  channel,  and  Philip  revenged  himself  by  stirring 
Robert,  William's  son,  to  revolt.  ^ 

2  Interesting  to  notice  how  in  the  5U«ee^sion  of  Capetians  able  kings 
alternated  with  faineants.  To  Philip  I  succeeds  Louis  the  Fat,  one  of 
whose  best-deserved  titles  was  '  the  wide-awake.'  Louis  VII  came  next 
[1137-80],  with  equal  propriety  dubbed  'the  foolish.'  It  was  he  who 
lost  above  50,000  men  for  naught  in  the  second  crusade,  and  who,  by  the 
divorce  of  his  first  queen,  Eleanor  of  Aquitaine,  alienated  that  province 
with  Poitou  to  England,  whose  soon-to-be  King  Henry  II  married  Eleanor 
in  six^.weeks  from  her  divorce.  Suger  opposed  this  divorce  in  vain. 
Philip  Augustus,  France's  next  monarch  [1 180-1223],  was  one  of  her  very 
greatest,  a  worthy  successor  of  Charlemagne,  but  Louis  VIII  [1223-26] 
was  wholly  insignificant,  leaving  '  no  glory  save  that  of  having  been  the 
son  of  Philip  Augustus,  the  husband  of  Blanche  of  Castile,  and  the  father 
of  St.  Louis.'  Philip  the  Bold  [i270-'85]  and  Philip  the  Fair  [1285- 
1314]  show  the  same  alternation,  and  so  in  some  degree  do  the  next  pair, 
Louis  X  [1314-16]  and  Philip  V  [i3i6-'22].  The  line  ends  with 
Charles  IV  [1322-28].  At  his  death  rose  the  great  question  whether  or 
not  the  succession  should  be  governed  by  the  Salic  law  [§  11,  n.  1], 
Edward  III  of  England,  Philip  Fair's  grandson,  claiming  as  next  of  kin, 
though  in  female  line,  against  Philip  of  Valois,  who  succeeded  as  Philip  VI, 
being  nearest  in  the  male  line. 

3  Suger's  was  an  interesting  life.    He  and  Louis  [the  Fat]  were  brought 


206    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

up  together,  the  prince  with  the  charity  boy,  in  the  monastery  of  St.  Denis, 
where  they  grew  to  be  warm  friends.  When  Louis  in  1 108  became  king, 
he  took  his  old  intimate  for  his  minister. 

4  As  all  his  Capetian  predecessors  had  had  to  do  for  some  fiefs.  Philip's 
refusal  was  an  assumption  of  a  pronounced  superiority  in  kind,  of  the  king 
over  all,  even  the  greatest,  of  those  landholders  hitherto  esteemed  his  peers. 

6  'The  king's  forty  days,'  an  enforced  truce  for  that  length  of  time 
between  a  murder,  e.g.,  and  the  taking  of  private  vengeance,  which  the 
times  were  as  yet  too  rude  to  forbid  entirely.  Yet  the  interval  often  led 
to  adjudication  by  regular  legal  methods.  Choiseul-Daillecourt,  Inf.  des 
Croisades,  n.  99. 

6  See  §  16,  n.  2. 

7  Arthur  Plantagenet  [duke  of  Brittany,  and  so  Philip's  vassal],  son  of 
Geoffrey,  John's  elder  brother,  wished  to  wrest  England  from  John.  Philip 
permitted  French  knights  to  join  the  expedition.  But  on  April  3,  1203, 
Arthur  was  assassinated,  by  John's  own  hand  according  to  Guizot,  at  any 
rate  through  his  agency.  See  Freeman,  Norm.  Conq.,  ch.  xxvii.  Philip 
summons  John  as  his  vassal  for  Normandy  to  answer  for  this  felony,  and 
on  his  non-appearance  declares  that  immense  fief  forfeited  to  the  crown  of 
France.  Bretagne,  which  had  been  a  sub-fief  to  Normandy,  becomes  an 
immediate  fief  of  France,  carrying  with  it  Poitou,  Maine,  Touraine  and 
Anjou,  which  had  subjected  themselves  to  Arthur  on  Richard's  death.  On 
the  rise  of  the  French  power  of  the  English  kings,  Duruy,  376.  Cf. 
Green's  map,  H.  of  Eng.  People,  vol.  i,  p.  160  [Shorter  H.,  p.  100]. 

8  Martin,  vol.  iv,  348.  The  settlement  of  1229,  at  the  close  of  the  ter- 
rible Albigensian  Crusade  [Ch.  VII,  §  16],  was  to  the  effect  that  Ray- 
mond VII,  the  new  Count  of  Toulouse,  should  give  up  all  lower  Languedoc 
to  France  at  once,  hold  the  remainder  of  the  Toulouse  possessions  during 
his  life,  and  make  them  at  death  the  dowry  of  his  only  daughter,  the  fiancee 
of  Alphonso,  Philip's  third  son.  The  Capetian  house  thus  became  for  the 
first  time  dominant  in  the  South.  Philip  Augustus  did  not  live  to  see  the 
arrangement  of  1 229,  yet  it  resulted  from  his  astute  planning.  Observe 
that  the  Capetian  power  marched  forward  by  i)  increasing  the  lands  im- 
mediately belonging  to  the  duchy  of  France,  and  ii)  reducing  the  peers  of 
France,  or  crown  vassals,  to  a  subjection  practically  as  complete  as  that  of 
the  vassals  of  France,  the  legal  difference  of  these  two  species  of  subjection 
being  at  length  lost  from  view.  The  evolution  had  gone  far  even  under 
Philip  Augustus,  whom  we  find  treating  crown  vassals  as  if  they  had  be- 
longed to  his  French  duchy,  forcing  them  to  defer  to  him,  hitherto  regarded 
their  peer,  as  their  liege  suzerain.     Heeren,  Pol.  Werke,  II,  166  sq. 


feudalism  and  the  french  monarchy       20"j 
§  1 8     Saint  Louis 

Masson,  St.  Louis  and  the  13th  century.    Martin,  vol.  v.    Milman,  XI,  i.    Kitchin, 
vol.  i,  bk.  iii,  ch.  viii.     Guizot,  2d  course,  xiv. 

Saint  Louis,  1 226-' 70,  was  a  brave,  a  sagacious  and, 
at  home,  a  successful  captain,1  yet  of  his  vast  territorial 
acquisitions  the  sword  was  much  less  the  instrument 
than  happy  negotiations  and  alliances.  His  mightiest 
engine  in  uplifting  his  kingdom  was  after  all  the  tran- 
scendent excellence  of  his  character.  With  little  of  the 
folly  then  so  commonly  attaching  to  preeminent  devo- 
tion, he  was  a  man  of  the  most  pronounced  religious 
conviction  and  life,  in  righteousness  the  light  of  his 
time,  another  Aurelius,  a  better  Charlemagne,  richly 
meriting  his  title  of  '  Saint.'  Abroad  he  exalted  France, 
being  repeatedly  chosen  arbiter  of  disputes  concerning 
other  rulers,2  at  home  he  sanctified  royalty,  the  tendency 
ever  after  him  being  to  view  the  king  as  of  necessity 
the  embodiment  and  source  of  justice.  Thus  the  royal 
jurisdiction  acquired  a  prestige  and  steadiness  hitherto 
unknown.  Louis  was  politic  as  well  as  good  and  brave. 
More  feudal  in  spirit  than  his  grandfather,  less  inclined 
to  open  breach  with  the  old  system,  he  used  meas- 
ures far  more  fatal  to  it  than  any  of  those  of  Philip 
Augustus.  His  abolition  throughout  the  royal  domains 
proper,  of  judicial  combats,3  was  an  innovation  veritably 
revolutionary.  He  also  dared  to  legislate  for  the  do- 
mains of  his  vassals,  to  call  burghers  into  his  council 
and  to  broaden  the  right  of  appeal  from  feudal  to  royal 
courts  as  well  as  the  class  of  causes  which  these  alone 
could  try.  Every  freeman  might  now  if  he  would,  be 
tried  before  the  king's  bailiff  if  not  before  the  king  him- 


208    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

self.  The  new  rigor  and  frequency  of  royal  assizes  in- 
sisted upon  by  this  just  ruler  brought  about  the  momen- 
tous change  of  the  king's  court  and  the  court  of  peers 
into  the  Parliament  of  Paris.4  In  this,  the  ignorance 
of  the  feudal  judges  unfitting  them  to  handle  the  now 
necessary  evidence  and  laws,  especially  the  Roman,  more 
and  more  pressing  into  use,  plebeian  jurisconsults  were 
introduced  to  aid  them.  The  judiciary  became  affair  of 
the  third  estate.  Thus,  the  lawyers  as  well  as  the  law 
which  they  mainly  administered  being  favorable  to  the 
king,  the  entire  course  of  feudal  as  of  royal  justice  was 
under  his  influence  and  made  to  minister  to  his  ends.5 

1  For  his  ill  success  as  a  crusader,  see  Ch.  VII,  §  15.  St.  Louis  pushed 
conquests  at  home  by  no  means  as  far  as  he  might  easily  have  done  but 
for  his  conscientious  and  pacific  temper.  He  labored  less  to  extend  than 
to  unify  and  consolidate  his  realm,  to  establish  order  and  diffuse  and 
deepen  the  national  spirit.  Under  him  monarchy  has  become  essential  to 
the  feudal  system,  it  being  now  a  maxim  that  the  whole  lay  jurisdiction  ema- 
nates from  the  king.    Hence  feudalism  from  this  time  rapidly  declines  [§  1 1]. 

2  Most  memorable  was  his  intervention  between  Henry  III  of  England, 
and  his  barons.  He  decided  favorably  to  the  English  monarchy,  yet  ex- 
pressly saving  the  Great  Charter  and  England's  traditional  liberties,  beau- 
tifully exhorting  withal,  '  that  the  king  of  England  and  his  barons  do 
mutually  forgive  each  other,  that  they  do  forget  all  the  resentments  that 
may  exist  between  them  in  consequence  of  the  matters  submitted  to  our 
arbitration,  and  that  henceforth  they  do  refrain  reciprocally  from  any  of- 
fence and  injury  on  account  of  the  same.'  The  appeals  of  Henry  and 
of  the  barons  and  Louis's  response  are  all  given  in  full  in  Stubbs,  Select 
Charters,  406  sqq.  Freeman,  Norman  Conquest,  vol.  i.  52,  makes  Alfred 
the  greatest  of  all  human  rulers  and  St.  Louis  next.  But  Louis  could  not 
wholly  transcend  his  age.  His  '  establishments '  condemn  heretics  to  death. 
He  sanctioned  the  Inquisition,  and  his  confidence  in  the  miraculous  power 
of  saints'  relics  was  unbounded,  causing  him  often  to  be  imposed  upon  by 
vendors. 

3  By  feudal  law  doubtful  cases  were  often  decided  by  various  sorts  of 
ordeals.    The  defendant  must  plunge  his  arm  in  boiling  water  and  with- 


FEUDALISM    AND    THE   FRENCH    MONARCHY  2CX) 

i  aw  it  unharmed,  walk  upon  burning  coals  receiving  no  injury,  or  float  in 
U,e  water  with  his  arms  tied.  Plaintiff  and  defendant  often  fought  to 
decide  guilt,  or  a  suitor  regularly  condemned  might  quash  his  sentence  by 
a  successful  duel — judicial  combat  —  with  each  judge  who  had  declared 
against  him,  a  custom  which  made  might  sole  determinant  of  right.  Louis's 
law  abrogating  this  barbarous  practice,  though  meant  at  first  only  for  his 
own  domain,  Philip  Fair  applied  little  by  little  in  the  remotest  districts  of 
France.  See  Martin,  vol.  iv,  290  sqq.,  303,  311  sqq.  Martin,  from  the 
origin  of  the  word  '  gage '  in  the  phrase  '  gage  of  battle '  [gage  =  pledge  : 
the  challenger  leaving  a  pledge  with  the  judges]  considers  the  custom  as  of 
Celtic  not  less  than  of  German  origin. 

4  Martin,  vol.  iv.  294;  Thierry,  Tiers  Etat,  I,  ii;  Bancroft  and  Des- 
maze,  as  in  bibliog. ;  Secretan,  500  sqq.  The  origin  of  the  Parliament  of 
Paris  is  uncertain  and  has  occasioned  much  controversy.  The  most  recent 
investigations  derive  it  not  from  the  ancient  national  assemblies  [Ch.  IV, 
§  15,  n.  3]  but  from  the  king's  council,  i.e.,  his  feudal  court.  This  in  turn 
had  grown  up  from  a  blending  of  i)  the  old  feudal  court  of  the  duchy  of 
France,  such  as  all  the  great  vassals  had,  with  ii)  the  court  of  peers,  which 
Philip  Augustus  assembled  in  1203  for  the  condemnation  of  John.  We  read 
little  of  the  latter  court  save  on  this  memorable  occasion,  for  the  reason  that 
it  pertained  to  royalty,  which  till  now  had  for  centuries  been  in  abeyance; 
but  the  court  cannot  have  been  created  now.  We  regard  it  as  in  some 
sort  related  to  the  ancient  national  assemblies.  The  king's  council  grew 
into  the  Parliament  of  Paris  by  assuming  certain  attributions,  anti-feudal  in 
nature,  from  the  royal  chamber,  to  which  the  king's  bailiffs  and  seneschals 
rendered  their  accounts.  This  famous  Parliament  [several  similar  ones 
subsequently  existed  in  various  parts  of  France],  whose  history  is  traceable 
from  this  time  to  the  Revolution,  was  mainly  not  a  legislature  but  a  court, 
yet  with  administrative  and  even  legislative  functions  [Ch.  X,  §  9],  division 
of  these  powers  not  being  yet  thought  necessary.  The  new  royal  and 
Romanic  judicial  system  killed  out  in  France  the  jury-element  present  in 
old  feudal  justice,  —  this  at  precisely  the  time  when  the  jury  was  becoming 
a  great  power  in  England.     See  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History,  ch.  xiii. 

8  In  keeping  with  this  was  the  new  definiteness  imported  even  into 
feudal  law  by  St.  Louis's  famous  '  establishments.'  This  same  king  under- 
mined papal  power  as  truly  and  as  unwittingly  as  he  did  feudal.  His 
1  pragmatic  sanction '  contained  the  principles  of  Gallicanism,  subordinating 
church  to  state  and  setting  firm  limits  to  papal  power  in  France.  '  The 
ecclesiastical  supremacy  built  up  by  a  hero,  crumbled  under  the  strokes  of 
a  saint.'  —  Martin,  IV,  310;   Bastard  d'Estang,  ch.  v. 


2io       feudalism  and  the  french  monarchy 
§  19    Philip  the  Fair 

Martin,  vols,  iv-vi.  Hallam,  ch.  vii,  pt.  ii.  Duruy,  400  sqq.  Milman,  XI,  viii  sqq., 
XII.  Tosti,  Storia  di  Bonifazio  VIII  e  di  suoi  tempi,  2  v.  Kitchin,  vol.  i,  bk. 
iii,  ch.  x.     Guizot,  ad  course,  xv. 

This  energetic  monarch,  1285-13 14,  continued  Saint 
Louis's  policy,  but  in  a  different  spirit,  less  feudal,  less 
religious,  far  less  just.1  The  age  of  crusades  and  of 
religious  fanaticism  was  past,  that  of  politics  come. 
Philip  was  the  'lawyers'  king,'  the  spirit  of  the  pan- 
dects 2  swaying  all  his  acts.  Not  without  desire  of  con- 
quest or  success  therein,3  he  labored  chiefly  to  make  his 
monarchy  absolute.  He  (1)  gets  into  his  hands  the 
coinage  of  money,4  hitherto  partaken  by  most  of  the 
great  lords,  (2)  renders  himself  independent  of  his  vas- 
sals by  employing  hired  soldiers 5  and  (3)  secures  the 
favor  of  the  third  estate  by  summoning  their  delegates 
to  the  states-general.6  This  was  in  1302,  when  Pope 
Boniface  VIII  excommunicated  Philip  for  taxing  the 
clergy.  Influenced  by  the  new  study  of  canon  law, 
this  haughty  pope  renewed  all  the  assumptions  of  Greg- 
ory VII  and  Innocent  III.7  But  times  had  changed  and 
excommunication  no  longer  inspired  the  old  terror.  Un- 
popular as  was  Philip  through  the  rigor  and  exactions 
of  his  rule,  the  pope  proved  more  so.  The  Inquisition 
and  the  wealth  and  insatiable  pecuniary  demands  of  the 
clergy  with  the  dissoluteness  of  the  lives  of  many  among 
them  had  alienated  the  popular  heart.  The  bull  clericis 
laicos,%  forbidding  all  ecclesiastics  to  pay  tribute  unless 
permitted  by  Rome,  awakened  the  more  hostility  from 
the  limitation  which  Saint  Louis  had  already  put  to 
papal  authority  in  France,  and  although  the  charges  of 


FEUDALISM    AND    THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY  211 

misconduct  which  the  ansculta  fili  brought  against  Philip 
were  mostly  true,  the  latter  found  not  only  the  states- 
general  but  the  solid  nation  at  his  back  against  the 
pope.  Boniface,  defeated,  died,  and  with  him,  so  far  as 
its  power  was  concerned,  his  theory  of  the  papacy. 
•  The  drama  of  Anagni  is  to  be  set  against  the  drama  of 
Canossa.'9  With  the  papacy  fell  its  chief  supporters  in 
France,  the  Templars.  The  king's  attack  upon  these, 
witnesses  in  the  strongest  manner  to  the  power  royalty 
had  now  attained,  since  they  were  numerous  and  wealthy, 
related  to  all  the  aristocracy  of  Europe,  and  nowise 
clearly  guilty  of  the  charges  brought  against  them.10 

1  Martin,  IV,  392,  well  sets  forth  how  despicable  Philip  Fair's  govern- 
ment was.  Had  it  not  been  a  means  to  something  better  than  itself  it 
would  appear  even  less  tolerable  than  feudalism.  We  are  in  doubt  whether 
to  approve  his  motives  in  attacking  the  Inquisition,  forbidding  clerks  to 
practise  in  civil  courts  or  any  but  manifest  heretics  to  be  imprisoned  on 
religious  grounds. 

2  See  Ch.  Ill,  §  II,  esp.  n.  5. 

8  He  took  Guyenne  from  Edward  I  of  England,  and  conquered  all 
Flanders  except  Ghent.  Flanders  was  then  the  richest  land  in  Europe. 
He  inherited  his  father's  war  with  Aragon,  in  which  he  was  less  successful, 
though  retaining  Navarre. 

4  Saint  Louis  had  wrought  at  this  problem  but  had  succeeded  only  in 
imparting  a  measure  of  honesty  to  the  seignorial  coinage  without  getting 
rid  of  this.  Our  present  word  '  seigniorage '  to  denote  the  amount  by 
which  a  piece's  real  value  fails  below  its  face  value  attests  the  manner  in 
which  feudal  '  seigniors '  turned  coining  to  their  own  advantage.  The 
practice  of  Philip  was  no  better.     See  Martin,  IV,  426. 

5  The  beginning  in  France  of  standing  armies. 

6  An  assembly  of  the  barons,  chief  ecclesiastics  and  deputies  of  com- 
munes, 2  or  3  from  each,  'to  deliberate  on  certain  affairs  concerning  in  the 
highest  degree  king,  kingdom,  church  and  all  and  sundry.'  Its  prototype 
was  the  ancient  national  assembly,  now  so  long  in  desuetude,  yet  this  of 
April  10,  1302,  was  a  fresh  beginning,  and  is  justly  reckoned  as  the  first 
states-general  in  French  history.     Had   the  feudal  aristocrats  been  wise 


212    FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY 

they  would,  as  they  then  could,  have  prevented  this  influential  precedent 
of  summoning  burghers. 
»  See  Ch.  V,  §§  13  sqq. 

8  These  papal  bulls  are  usually,  as  here,  named  by  their  opening  words. 
On  Saint  Louis's  attitude  to  the  papal  power  in  France,  see  last  §,  n.  5. 
In  the  unam  sanctam  Boniface  even  exceeded  in  assumption  his  famous 
predecessors  named.  I,  he  said,  am  emperor  and  king  in  being  pope. 
He  was  the  pontiff  who  founded  the  University  of  Rome,  mainly  to  ad- 
vance the  claims  and  widen  the  knowledge  of  canon  law.  See  Creighton, 
Papacy  during  Reformation,  Int.;  Voigt,  Wiederbelebung  d.  kl.  Alter- 
thums,  II,  44. 

9  Martin.  Win.  of  Nogaret,  a  bright  but  pliant  emissary  of  Philip,  went 
to  Anagni  where  Boniface  was  sojourning,  and,  allying  himself  with 
Sciarra  Colonna,  the  pope's  deadliest  enemy,  and  bribing  the  militia  of 
Anagni,  secured  Boniface's  person.  Colonna  even  smote  the  pontiff, 
86  years  of  age,  with  his  ironed  gauntlet,  which  must  have  been  a  con- 
cause  of  his  death.  See  Duruy,  410.  The  popes  now  became  creatures 
of  French  kings.  Omitting  Benedict  XI,  the  first  [reigning  but  7  or  8 
months],  Boniface's  7  immediate  successors  resided  at  Avignon  [papal 
territory  indeed  from  1348-1791  yet  within  and  subject  to  France],  and 
the  western  church  was  as  subservient  to  France  as  the  eastern  of  old 
to  the  emperor.  Creighton,  I,  22  sq.,  shows  how  this  enslavement  pro- 
ceeded from  the  introduction  of  Anjou  into  Naples  [Ch.  V,  last  §  and 
notes],  the  precise  arrangement  which  popes  supposed  would  set  them  free. 

10  On  the  suppression  of  the  Templars,  see  Michelet,  France,  vol.  iii; 
Milman,  XII,  i,  ii,  v;   Werner,  Templars  in  Cyprus  [a  poem]. 

§  20     Monarchy  Supreme 

Duruy,  Temps  Modernes,  ch.  ii.  Kirk,  Hist,  of  Charles  the  Bold.  Commines, 
Memoirs  [of  Louis  XI,  Charles  VIII  and  Charles  the  Bold].  Student's  France,  bk.  iv. 
Kitchin,  vol.  ii.  bk.  i. 

At  Philip  the  Fair's  death  in  I3i4the  French  mon- 
archy stood  forth  as  a  victorious  national  and  political 
power,  past  all  serious  danger.1  Even  the  desperate 
feudal  reaction  under  Charles  VII  and  Louis  XI,2  1422- 
'83,  was  unavailing.  If  the  Hundred  Years'  War,3  1339- 
1453,  weakened  the  monarchy  absolutely,  it  precisely  as 


FEUDALISM  AND  THE  FRENCH  MONARCHY     213 

in  England  much  strengthened  it  relatively  to  all  the 
feudal  elements  of  society.  Many  old  aristocratic  fami- 
lies were  ruined,  standing  armies  were  introduced,  for- 
eign war  had  deepened  and  quickened  national  feeling. 
The  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  saw  feudal  opposition 
to  royalty  practically  dead,  France  one  state  and  people 
with  but  one  law  for  all.  The  monarchy  after  Louis  XI 
was  theoretically  as  well  as  practically  absolute,  the 
states-general  at  Tours  in  1484  propounding  the  maxim 
that  'all  justice  emanates  from  the  king.'  Francis  I 
could  confirm  his  ordinances  by  the  ( car  tel  est  notre 
bon  plaisir?  and  the  descendants  of  those  lords  before 
whom  early  Capetians  had  trembled  learned  to  beg  as  a 
distinguished  honor  the  privilege  of  passing  the  king 
his  food  at  dinner  or  his  night-robe  when  he  retired. 
Two  errors  must  here  be  avoided,  that  of  supposing  the 
whole  of  feudalism  to  have  vanished  with  its  power 
against  the  king,4  and  that  of  regarding  this  victory  by 
monarchy  immediately  a  victory  for  freedom.5  To  a 
great  extent  it  was  the  reverse.  Kings  protected  com- 
munal liberties  only  while  the  communes  were  of  aid 
in  fighting  aristocracy.  The  aristocracy,  once  humbled, 
found  the  king  ever  its  trusty  ally  against  the  third 
estate,  which  in  the  great  Revolution  had  to  overthrow 
both  together. 

1  Philip  Augustus  was  the  last  prospective  French  king  to  be  crowned 
during  a  father's  lifetime,  as  had  been  thought  the  necessary  course  among 
the  earlier  Capetians  and  in  the  empire  [Ch.  V,  §  g,  n.  2].  Philip  the 
Bold's  coronation  was  delayed  months  after  Saint  Louis's  death. 

2  Duruy  and  Kirk,  as  above.  To  Louis  XI  at  his  accession,  1461,  the 
outlook  was  indeed  forbidding.  The  aristocracy  made  its  last  great  fight 
for  supremacy  in  the  so-called  Ligtte  dn  bien  public,  formed  by  500  princes 
or  lords  and  headed  by  the  famous  Charles  the  Bold,  or  Rash,  duke  of 


214  FEUDALISM    AND    THE    FRENCH    MONARCHY 

Burgundy.  The  latter's  domains  about  equalled  Louis's  in  size  [see  Bryce, 
Appendix  A],  and  he  was  bent  on  enlarging  them  into  a  vast  kingdom  con- 
terminous with  that  which  the  Treaty  of  Verdun,  843,  had  given  to  Lothar 
[Ch.  V,  §  7,  n.  2],  a  plan  necessitating  his  seizure  of  Switzerland.  lie 
was  encouraged  rather  than  aided  against  Louis  by  Edward  IV  of  Eng- 
land, now  in  mid-struggle  against  Lancaster.  But  Charles,  falling  out 
with  Emperor  Frederic  III,  besieges  Neuss,  then  attacks  the  Swiss,  giving 
Louis  leisure  to  subdue  all  his  other  turbulent  vassals.  Charles's  fall  in 
the  battle  of  Nancy,  against  the  Swiss,  Jan.  5,  1477,  ^^  tne  French  king 
absolute  master.  It  must  be  remembered  that  Charles  the  Bold  was  duke 
and  vassal  of  France  only  in  respect  to  the  southwestern  section  of  his 
territories,  i.e.,  the  northwestern  part  of  the  ancient  kingdom  of  Bur- 
gundy, joined  to  France  by  Clovis's  sons  [Ch.  IV,  §  17],  now  the  depart- 
ments of  C6te-a"0r,  Yontie  and  Nievre,  and  that  for  Franche-Comte,  nearly 
the  present  department  of  Haute  Sabne,  he  was  a  count  and  a  vassal  of  the 
empire.  For  his  power  in  the  Netherlands  also,  and  the  complex  manner 
of  its  rise,  see  Freeman,  Hist'l  Geog.,  300  sqq.  Duruy  sums  up  Louis's 
work  at  T.  M.  p.  25.  Cf.  Michelet  [Eng.],  bk.  xi,  ch.  ii,  Martin,  vols, 
viii,  ix,  and  Willert,  Reign  of  Louis  XI.  The  year  of  Louis's  death,  1483, 
witnessed  the  birth  of  Luther  and  of  Rabelais. 

3  The  neatest  account  of  this  war  from  the  French  side  is  Daruy, 
Moyen  Age,  ch.  xxvii.  Read  also  Student's  France,  bk.  iv,  and  Kitchin, 
bk.  iv   [in  vol.  Q. 

4  The  League  and  the  Fronde  of  Huguenot  days  were  in  large  part 
feudal  phenomena.     See  later  sections  of  Ch.  IX,  also  Ch.  X,  §§  3-5. 

5  Even  the  new  civil  law  was  nearly  as  faulty  through  its  subtleties  as 
the  feudal  had  been  through  irregularity.  Michelet,  int.  to  vol.  vii,  seems 
to  conceive  the  victory  of  monarchy  as  a  downright  curse,  worse  than 
feudalism.  This  is  too  severe.  Interesting  to  mark  how  in  Norman  Eng- 
land, where  the  barons  were  fewer  and  more  united  than  in  France  yet 
the  kffig  more  advantageously  placed  from  the  first,  neither  party  was 
ever  in  c6ndition  to  slight  the  commons,  and  liberty  strode  forward  early 
and  strongly.     Ch.  IX,  §  18,  n.  1. 


SELECT   BIBLIOGRAPHY   TO   CHAPTER   VII 

Islam  :  Duruy,  Moyen  Age,  Livres  II,  VII.  Gilman,  Saracens  [Story 
of  Nations  Ser.].  Guizot,  H.  of  France,  I.  Gibbon,**  Chaps.  L-LXX. 
Milman,*  L.  C,  IV,  i,  ii.  '  Mohammedanism,'  *  in  Encyc.  Brit.,  and  in 
Lalor's  Cyclopaedia.  Draper,  Int'l  Develop't  of  Eur.,  xi,  xiii,  xvi.  Muir, 
Early  Caliphate;  Rise  and  Decline  of  Islam.  Neale,  H.  of  Islam,  2  v. 
Ockley  [in  Bohn],  H.  of  the  Saracens.  Bosworth-Smith,  Mohammed 
and  Mohammedanism  [Roy.  Inst.  Lectures].  Stobart,  Islam  and  its 
Founder,  v.  Ranke,  Weltgesch*  Th.  V.  Hertzberg,  Gesch.  d.  Byzan- 
tiner  u.  d.  osmanischen  Reichs.  Arnold,  Islam,  its  Character  and  Rel.  to 
Ch'ty.  Ali  Malmi  [a  native  of  India],  L.  and  Teachings  of  Mohammed 
[an  apology].  Dozy,  Essai  sur  Vhist.  d.  Islamisme.  Weil,  Mohammed : 
Leben  u.  Lehre ;  Gesch.  d.  islam.  V'olker ;  Gesch.  der  Khalifen,  5  v. 
Sprenger,  Leben  u.  Lehre  Mohammed 's,**  3  v.  [the  best].  Freeman, 
H.  and  Conq.  of  Saracens.**  Kremer,  Gesch.  d.  herrschenden  Ldeen  d. 
Lslams.  Fairbairn,  Policy  of  Islam  [Contemp.  Rev.,  Dec.  1882].  La 
Jonquiere,  Hist,  de  V empire  Ottoman  depuis  les  origines,  etc.  Muller 
[in  Oncken],  Islam  im  Morgen-  u.  Abendland**  [1  vol.  out].  Hughes, 
Dictionary  of  Islam  [Scribner].  The  Crusades:  'Crusades,'  in  Encyc. 
Brit., and  in  Lalor's  Cyclopaedia.  Cox,  Crusades*  [Ep. of  Hist.].  Michaud, 
H.  of  Crusades,  3  v.  [last  ed.  1840].  Mills,  do.,  2  v.  Michelet,  France, 
vol.  ii.  Kugler  [in  Oncken],  Gesch.  d.  Kreuzziige  **  [the  ablest :  see 
ch.  i,  n.,  for  literature].  Wilken,  do.,  7  v.  [1807-32].  v.  Sybel,  Gesch. 
d.  ersten  Kreuzzuges  **  ;  Kl.  hist.  Schriften  [several  essays];  H.  and  Lit. 
of  the  Crusades.**  Poole,  '  Egypt,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.  Funk,  Gemalde 
a  us  dem  Zeitalter  d.  Kreuzziige**  3  v.  Prutz,  Kulturgesch.  d.  Zeitalter 
d.  Kreuzziige  [1883].  Henne-am-Rhyn,  Kulturgesch.  d.  Kreuzziige 
[1884].  Raumer,  Hohenstaufen*  6  v.  Choiseul-Daillecourt,  L 'in- 
fluence des  Croisades.**  Heeren  \_Hist.  Werke,  //],  Folgen  d.  Kreuz- 
ziige.* [The  2  wks.  last  named  shared  the  French  Institute  prize  in  1808.] 
Heyd,  Levantehandel  im  Miltelalter**  2  v.  Finlay,  H.  of  Greece,**  7  v. 
Hopf,  Gesch.  Griechenlands**  [in  Ersch  u.  Gruber's  Encyclopadie]. 
Scott  [Sir  W.],  Count  Robert  of  Paris.  Stephen,  Lect.  on  H.  of  Fr., 
vi  and  vii.  [The  works  of  Giesebrecht  and  Hertzberg  mentioned  in 
bibliogg.  to  Chaps.  IV  and  V  contain  valuable  matter  on  hist,  of  Crusades.] 


CHAPTER  VII 

ISLAM     AND   THE   CRUSADES 


§  i     Arabia  before  Mohammed 

Gibbon,  ch.  1.      Sale's  Koran,  prelim.  Disc,  i.    Milman,  IV,  i.     Kreel,   Vorislam 
Flugel,  Gesch.  d.  Araber.    Duruy,  ch.  vi.     '  Arabia,'  in  Encyc.  Brit. 

To  the  Teutons,  Slavs  and  Huns  setting  forth*  for 
the  boulevcrsement  of  the  world,  succeeded  the  Arabs. 
Upon  these  remote  nomads  in  their  isolated  home  the 
great  classic  peoples  and  ages  had  scarcely  exerted  any 
influence.1  Of  the  conquerors  :  Alexander,  the  Ptole- 
mies, Pompey,  Augustus,  Trajan,  who  meditated  Ara- 
bian conquest,  the  last  alone  gained  foothold  in  the 
land,  and  he  only  in  Petraea.2  The  seventh  century 
found  the  Arabs  as  they  were  earlier  and  are  now,  in  a 
state  of  nature  rather  than  of  culture,  intelligent  though 
more  imaginative  than  deep,  warlike,  living  in  clans, 
without  ability  or  desire  for  strong  or  central  govern- 
ment. Chronicles  and  myths  were  their  only  history, 
Sabianism 3  their  dominant  religion.  Mecca  with  its 
Caaba 4  was  already  a  national  sanctuary,  the  centre  of 
a  sort  of  fetish  cult,  whose  exact  nature  is  unknown. 
Judaism  was  present,  some  tribes  having  embraced  it. 
The  Bible  existed  in  Arabic  and  was  respected.  Chris- 
tians, mostly  heretics,  as  Ebionites,5  Arians,  Nestorians, 
Monophysites,  had  sought  refuge  there  and  disseminated 


2l8  ISLAM   AND   THE   CRUSADES 

their  doctrines  with  more  or  less  success.  It  resulted 
that  monotheism  had  secured  wide  sway,  and  that 
among  the  more  thoughtful,  idolatry  was  less  a  convic- 
tion than  a  habit. 

1  See  Horace,  Odes,  I,  xxix,  III,  xxiv,  to  the  effect  that  the  kings  of 
Sabaea  had  never  yet  been  conquered  and  that  their  immense  wealth  was 
yet  '  intact.'  The  very  expedition  to  which  Horace  refers  in  the  earlier 
passage  cited,  i.e.,  that  of  Aelius  Gallus  in  B.C.  24,  under  Augustus,  was 
an  entire  as  well  as  a  very  costly  failure.  Alexander  the  Great  intended 
to  invade  Arabia  but  died  before  executing  his  purpose. 

2  The  triangular  piece  of  territory  between  the  two  branches  of  the 
Red  Sea. 

3  Star-worship,  originally  derived  from  Babylon,  but  in  Mohammed's 
time  modified  by  Christian  elements.  See  Sale's  Discourse,  section  i.  The 
Sabians  were  tolerated  by  Mohammed  on  paying  tribute,  and  were  known 
in  later  centuries  as  the  Christians  of  St.  John  the  Baptist. 

4  Gibbon,  ch.  1,  has  a  good  description  of  this  very  ancient  temple. 
When  it  was  purified  by  Mohammed  of  its  360  idols,  one  of  these  was 
found  to  be  a  Byzantine  image  of  the  Virgin,  the  infant  Christ  in  her  arms. 
—  Duruy,  Moyen  Age,  95.  Duruy  believes  that  part  of  the  early  Chris- 
tian influences  in  Arabia  were  from  Abyssinia.  The  Abyssinians  were 
Christians,  and  had  conquered  S.  W.  Arabia  [Vemen]  in  525  A.D. 

5  The  Ebionites  were  those  numerous  primitive  Christians  who,  while 
accepting  Christ,  still  held  to  all  the  Jewish  observances.  The  other  sects 
named  are  briefly  described  at  Ch.  Ill,  §  19.  Cf.  Hagenbach,  H.  of  Doc- 
trines, index,  and  Sale's  Disc,  ii. 

§  2     Mohammed 

Milman,  IV,  i.  Draper,  xi.  Wellhausen,  Muhammed  in  Medina  [Lit.  Centralblatt, 
44,  1882].  Irving,  Mahomet  and  his  Successors.  '  Mohammedanism,'  in  Encyc. 
Brit. 

Mohammed  originated  much,  but  less  than  is  com- 
monly supposed.  Among  the  world's  great  men  he  is 
the  hardest  to  judge  fairly, — not  an  impostor,  nor  a 
mere  fanatic,  yet  fanatical,  politic,  selfish  and  unscrupu- 


ISLAM   AND    THE    CRUSADES  2IO, 

lous  while  deeply  religious,  nervous,  given  to  visions, 
perhaps  mentally  deranged.1  His  early  history  is  little 
known.2  He  was  of  noble  blood,  handsome,  eloquent. 
He  had  travelled  much,  meeting  both  Christians  and 
Jews,  unfortunately  learning  of  Jesus  mostly  from  apoc- 
ryphal3 sources,  and  of  Judaism  from  the  Talmud.4 
The  great,  inspiring  idea  which  he  obtained  hence,  lift- 
ing him  above  his  people's  superstition  and  making  him 
master  of  their  hearts  and  wills,  was  the  unity  of  God. 
•  There  is  no  god  but  God,  and  Mohammed  is  his 
prophet.' 5  Forced  in  consequence  of  his  attack  on 
idolatry  to  flee  from  Mecca,  his  temper  grows  harder, 
his  ambition  and  methods  more  worldly,  his  teaching 
less  spiritual.  Tangible  and  base  rewards  are  promised 
to  believers,  who  now  multiply  more  rapidly  and  appeal 
to  the  sword.6 

1  He  is  said  to  have  been  subject  to  epileptic  fits. 

2  Mohammed  belonged  to  the  Koreisch  tribe  or  sept,  and  to  the 
Hashim  family.  The  tribe  claimed  descent  from  Ishmael.  The  Hashims 
had  charge  of  the  Caaba.  The  family  tie  all  Arabians  held  sacred.  Family 
rivalry  caused  in  great  part  the  sectarian  quarrels  among  Mohammedans. 
See  §  4,  and  notes. 

8  I.e.,  those  multitudinous  second  and  third  century  writings  about 
Christ  and  early  Christianity  composed  in  imitation  of  the  New  Testament 
documents.  See  'Apocrypha'  and  'Canon'  in  Encyc.  Brit.,  Hilgenfeld, 
Nov.  Test,  extra  Canonem  Receptum,  and  Hone,  N.  T.  Apocrypha. 

*  The  Talmud  is  a  collection  of  Jewish  traditions,  authoritatively  [in 
Jews'  view]  illustrating  and  complementing  the  Old  Testament.  It  has 
two  parts,  the  Mischna,  which  is  the  original  tradition  proper,  and  the 
Gemara,  or  later  comments  of  various  Rabbis  upon  the  Mischna.  The 
whole  was  for  long  orally  transmitted,  but  the  Mischna  began  to  be  re- 
duced to  writing  about  200  A.D. 

8  See  Koran,  ch.  xxxv  and  passim. 

6  Bestmann,  Anfange  d.  katholischen  Christenthums  u.  d.  Islams 
[Nordlingen,  1884]. 


220  ISLAM    AND   THE   CRUSADES 

§  3     His  Doctrine 

Draper,  xi.  Sale,  Koran,  with  prelim.  Disc,  iii-vii.  Kreel,  Ueber  den  Koran. 
Sayous,  Jesus  Christ  d'apres  Mohammed,  etc.  Noldecke,  Gesch.  d.  Korans. 
Weil,  Historisch-  kritische  Enleitung  in  den  Koran. 

This  is  learned  from  two  sources  :  I  Al  Koran,  a  code 
both  civil  and  religious,  alleged  by  Mohammed  to  have 
been  revealed  to  him  from  God.  It  is  a  mixture  of 
meaningless  rhapsody  with  much  good  moral  and  relig- 
ious matter  from  Bible 1  and  Talmud.  Noticeable  is  its 
decided  exaltation  of  the  female  sex.  2  The  Sunna,  or 
oral  tradition,  which  was  committed  to  writing  long 
after  the  prophet's  death.  This  is  rejected  by  the 
Shiites.  Mohammed  was  a  severe  monotheist.  He 
regarded  Jesus,2  as  he  did  Moses,  a  prophet  true  and 
great,  but  only  human.  The  worship  of  him  as  divine, 
like  adoration  of  images,  he  thought  damnable  sin.  He 
made  much  of  faith,  the  very  word  '  moslem '  or  '  musul- 
man*  meaning  'believer,'  and  'islam'  'surrender  to  Al- 
lah,' but  still  more  of  works,  prayers,  ablutions,  fasts, 
temperance,  benevolence,  pilgrimages  to  Mecca,  which 
remained  the  national  sanctuary,  fighting  and  braving 
death  for  the  faith.  The  last  he  set  forth  as  par  excel- 
lence meritorious.  Divine  predestination  was  empha- 
sized and  exhibited  as  absolute,  and  solemn  judgment 
declared  in  store  for  men,  as  well  as  resurrection  of  the 
body  and  eternal  retribution.  It  was  urged  that  no 
true  believer  could  be  lost,  no  unbeliever  saved. 

1  The  Koran's  ever-recurring  reminders  of  God's  mercy  have  a  distinct 
Biblical  ring.  So  its  rules  concerning  females  and  orphans  much  resemble 
those  of  the  Mosaic  law.  Daughters  are  to  inherit  half  as  much  as  sons. 
Husbands  must  possess  authority  but  are  enjoined  to  use  this  with  tender- 
ness.    Monogamy  is  recommended  as  pleasing  to  God,  as  is  the  manumis* 


ISLAM   AND   THE    CRUSADES  221 

sion  of  slaves,  and  in  no  case  is  a  man  to  have  more  than  four  wives  at 
once  [ch.  ivj.  Mohammed's  command  also  did  away  with  the  old  Arab 
custom  of  burying  infants  alive. 

2  Mohammed  to  the  last  denied  his  own  ability  to  work  miracles  al- 
though admitting  that  Jesus  possessed  such.  He  admits  also  the  miracu- 
lous birth  of  Jesus  [ch.  xix].  Gibbon  [vol.  v,  108,  ed.  Milm.]  will  have 
it  that  the  doctrine  of  the  immaculate  conception  is  from  the  Koran. 

§  4    Mohammedan  Conquest 

Milman,  IV,  ii.    Duruy,  ch.  vi.    Sale's  Disc,  viii.     Gibbon,  1-lii.    Kugler,  ch.  1. 

The  new  faith  spread  with  incredible  speed.1  Mo- 
hammed died  master  of  Mecca,  prophet,  priest  and  king 
to  practically  the  whole  of  Arabia.  Yet  himself  only 
initiated  the  enormous  conquests  which  illustrate  his 
name.  In  less  than  a  century,  spite  of  their  mutual 
contests,2  constant,  fierce,  extensive,  Islam's  armies,  of- 
fering everywhere  the  alternatives,  '  Koran,  tribute  or 
the  sword,' 3  had  conquered  more  than  half  the  known 
world:  westward,  Africa,  Spain,  South  France  and  the 
main  Mediterranean  isles ;  eastward,  Persia  to  beyond 
the  Indus ;  northward,  all  Asiatic  Rome  except  Asia 
Minor.  Scourges  of  East  Rome,  as  the  Goths  and 
Vandals  once  were  of  West,  they  repeatedly  beset  the 
very  gates  of  Constantinople.  Rome  itself  narrowly 
escaped  falling  into  their  hands.4  For  a  century  Chris- 
tianity trembled  for  its  existence. 

1  571,  Mohammed  born. 
622,  Hegira,  July  16. 
630,  Mecca  taken. 

632,  Mohammed  dies.    Abu-Bekr  Caliph,  of  Sunnites; 
Shiites  recognize  Alt.     All  Arabia  Mohammedan. 
634~'44,   Omar  Caliph  and  Emir.     Conquest  of  the  East,  including 
Persia,  also  of  Egypt. 


222  ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES 

644 -'56,   Olhtnan  Caliph.     Further  conquest  in  North  Africa. 

656 -'61,  Ali  Caliph,  opposed  and  put   to  death  by  Sunnites,  who 
come  to  power  in  the 

661-750,  Ommiad  dynasty,  hereditary,  ruling  from  Damascus. 

707,  Africa  conquered  to  the  Atlantic.     The  Moors. 

711,  Battle  of    Xeres  de   la   Frontera:    Moors   wrest    Spain    from 
the  Visigoths.  [This  battle  really  on  the  Wadi  Recca.~\ 

732,  Battle  of  Poitiers.     Martell.     Greatest  reach  of  Mohammedan 
sway. 

750-1258,  Abbassids  of  Bagdad  supplant  the  Ommiads  in  Asia.     Ab- 
durrahman escapes  to  Spain  and  founds  the 

756-1031,  Ommiad  Caliphate  of  Cordova.    Abdurrahman,  Almanzor. 

935,  The  Emir  al  Omra  secures  the  temporal  power  at  Bagdad,  the 
Caliph  retaining  only  the  spiritual. 

968,  Fatimite  Caliphs  in  Africa. 
2  The  schism  between  Shiites  and  Sunnites  grew  into  that  between 
strict  and  liberal  Mohammedans  in  general.  The  Shiites  wished  to  keep 
the  Caliph's  office  in  Mohammed's  family.  Abu-Bekr  had  been  M.'s 
father-in-law,  Fatima  was  his  daughter,  Ali  his  son-in-law,  Fatima's  hus- 
band, Abbas  M.'s  great-grandson.  Fatimites,  Alides  and  Abbassids  were 
therefore  Mohammedans  of  a  straiter  type  than  Othman  and  the  Ommiads, 
the  latter  representing  more  the  Koreisch  tribe,  who  had  first  driven  the 
prophet  from  Mecca,  hating  the  Hashims  [§  2,  n.  2],  ignoring  the  family 
principle,  using  wine,  etc.  They  were  bitterly  opposed  by  the  Arabian 
Mohammedans,  whether  in  Arabia  or  about  Babylon,  where  many  immi- 
grants from  the  mother-land  had  settled.  At  last  the  family  of  Abbas, 
under  the  black  banner  of  Abul- Abbas  [Gibbon,  Hi],  took  up  the  cause  of 
Ali,  whom  Moawiah,  the  first  Ommiad  Caliph,  had  assassinated,  and  won 
the  caliphate  for  themselves  and  for  the  family  principle  again  in  750. 
Of  the  Ommiads  [white  banner]  all  were  slain  but  Abdurrahman,  who 
escaped  to  Spain.  As  Damascus  had  been  the  Ommiad  capital  Bagdad 
became  that  of  the  Abbassids.  After  Abul-Abbas,  Almanzor  the  Victo- 
rious, 754— '75,  Haroun  Alraschid,  or  the  Just,  786-809,  and  Almamun, 
8i3-'33,  were  the  great  Abbassid  Caliphs.  The  same  zeal  for  legitimacy 
gave  to  the  Fatimites,  professing  descent  from  Fatima  and  Ali,  the  ascend- 
ency in  Africa.  This  quarrel  has  come  down  to  our  own  time,  the  Turks 
being  liberals,  the  Mohammedans  of  Egypt  and  the  Soudan  orthodox, 
heirs  of  the  Fatimite  faith  and  zeal.  This  is  understood  to  have  been  at 
the  bottom  of  the  rebellion  headed  by  El  Mahdi  in  the  Soudan  and  Arabi 
Bey  in  Egypt  against  the  Turks  [whom  the  English  aided]  in  i882-'83. 


ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES  223 

8  This  meant  that  peoples  must  either  accept  Islam,  retain  their  faith 
at  the  price  of  such  tribute  as  pleased  the  Caliphs,  or  be  exterminated. 
Notice  how  soon  the  religion  of  Mohammed  ceased  to  be  an  Arabian 
affair,  becoming  ecumenical,  held,  proclaimed  and  enforced  by  Persians, 
Turks,  Copts,  Moors,  Goths,  etc.  By  the  middle  of  the  8th  century  the 
proportion  of  real  Arabian  population  in  these  out-lying  realms  began 
visibly  to  decrease.  Even  earlier  Arabia  had  ceased  to  send  out  troops, 
its  inhabitants  tending  back  to  the  Bedouin  life. 

4  See  Milman,  V,  Hi. 

§  5     The  Causes 

Milman,  vol.  ii,  113,  163  sqq.     Duruy,  97  sqq.     Sale's  Disc,  ii. 

For  this  gigantic  revolution  history  is  at  a  loss  fully 
to  account.  The  main  secret  of  it,  beyond  question, 
lay  not  in  numbers,  but  in  a  certain  wonderful  inspira- 
tion which,  at  this  particular  juncture,  transformed  the 
Arabian  people,  due  to  (i)  the  truth  in  their  religion, 
especially  its  central  idea,  divine  unity,1  (2)  the  enthu- 
siasm and  skill  of  leaders,  notably  Mohammed,  Amrou, 
Chaled  and  Omar,  (3)  the  new  sense  of  national  unity, 
(4)  hope  of  rewards,  both  temporal  and  eternal,2  (5)  fatal- 
ism.3 '  Woe,'  preached  Mohammed,  '  to  the  Musulman 
who  hugs  his  hearth  rather  than  go  fight.  Death  he 
cannot  shun,  for  the  term  of  life  is  fixed.  Fear  the 
heat  of  combats  ?  Hell  is  hotter  !  Flee  ?  Paradise  is 
before  you,  hell's  flames  behind.'  Also,  Islam  found 
Rome  and  Persia  weak.  Both  these  empires  were  large  : 
in  each,  provinces  lay  remote  from  the  capital,  difficult 
to  administer.  All  Rome's  Asiatic  and  African  subjects 
were  disaffected  politically,  theologically.4  The  Coptic 
and  all  the  African  Christians  welcomed,  if  they  did  not 
invite,  the  invaders.  Worst,  the  corruption  of  eastern 
Christianity  had  now  rendered  it  spiritless,  as  unworthy 


224  ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES 

as  it  was  unable,  successfully  to  oppose  this  new  and 
dreadful  foe.6 

1  It  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  the  early  Musulmans  held  a  purer 
monotheism  than  the  eastern  Christians  of  their  time.  They  were  also  the 
peers  of  those  Christians  in  all  elements  of  conduct  and  character.  Their 
aggressive  belief  encouraged  and  may  have  originated  iconoclasm  [Ch.  IV, 
§  19].  An  imaginative  race  just  opening  its  mind  to  the  conceptions  of 
unity  and  moral  order  in  the  universe  could  not  but  find  them  infinitely 
stimulating. 

2  Many  even  of  the  latter  were  not  of  the  most  spiritual  nature.  How- 
ever, one  cannot  in  fairness  to  the  prophet  interpret  his  sensuous  pictures 
of  the  future  state  so  coarsely  as  his  Christian  critics  have  usually  done. 

8  Nor  did  the  prophet  in  urging  this,  fall,  as  all  the  logic-books  imply, 
into  fallacy.  It  is  strictly  true  that  if  the  term  of  one's  life  is  fixed  one 
will  die  at  that  limit  whatever  he  does  or  omits.  Nor  are  urging  and  ex- 
hortation unreasonable  under  the  hypothesis  named,  as  they  may  be  among 
the  fated  conditions  to  the  fated  result.  Cf.  Cicero,  de  fato,  xii  and  xiii, 
Schopenhauer,  Welt  als  Wille,  I,  356. 

4  See  Montesquieu,  Grandeur  and  Decadence  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
chaps,  xxi,  xxii. 

6  Milman,  vol.  i,  24,  Michelet,  France,  bk.  iv,  ch.  iii. 

§  6     Spain  and  France 

Hallam,  ch.   iv.     Coppee,  Arabian   Conquest  of  Spain.     Viadot,  Mores  d'Espagnt. 
Irving,  Conquest  of  Spain. 

Incorporating  the  Berbers  or  Moors,1  the  Saracens 
crossed  into  Spain,  invited  by  the  Gothic  traitor,  Count 
Julian,  and  enraged  by  the  aid  which  the  Visigoths  had 
furnished  to  their  Byzantine  foes  in  Africa.  The  Goths 
now  held  practically  the  entire  peninsula,2  having  ab- 
sorbed the  Sueves  and  driven  the  Byzantines  from  the 
coast.  The  state  had  acquired  still  further  strength  by 
becoming  catholic,3  yet  proved  far  weaker  than  it  seemed. 
1  Its  elective 4  character  caused  numerous  bitter  fac- 
tions  and   left   the   nation   practically  without  a  head. 


ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES  225 

2  The  poor  and  the  Jews,  oppressed,  hailed  and  helped 
the  Saracens  as  their  deliverers.  3  Owing  to  the  long 
peace  that  had  prevailed  arms  and  military  discipline 
had  been  laid  aside,  battlements  and  strongholds  razed. 
4  The  clergy  was  powerful  and  overbearing.  The 
Council  of  Toledo  had  become  a  national  parliament, 
wherein,  despite  the  presence  of  lay  members,  bishops 
were  omnipotent,  hating,  hated,  and  at  best  poor  ad- 
visers for  time  of  war.  Of  the  order  and  character  of 
events  in  this  revolution  we  know  little.  From  their 
costly  but  complete  victory  at  Becca  the  Moors  pressed 
rapidly  northward.  In  eight  years  they  had  subdued 
the  whole  Gothic  realm  except  the  little  kingdom  of 
Asturias.5  The  crisis  for  Christianity  when,  in  720, 
they  passed  the  Pyrenees,  was  not  then  appreciated. 
The  Frankish  kingdom  was  distracted  by  internal  feuds, 
selfish  and  temporary,  not  Christian,  interests  ruled  the 
hour.  Eudo  of  Aquitaine  was  left  to  oppose  the  Sara- 
cens ten  years  alone,  and  to  be  crushed  by  them,  Mar- 
tell  himself  assisting,  before  Martell  would  draw  sword 
against  the  common  foe.  The  victory  of  Poitiers,6  732, 
that  so  solemn  moment  in  history,  was  due  less  to  the 
devotion  of  Christians  than  to  the  dissensions  of  their 
enemy.  After  raging  seven  days  it  was  a  drawn  battle, 
although  the  Moors  retired  next  night,  Poitiers  remain- 
ing the  northern  term  of  their  march.  The  Franks 
required  seven  years  to  cut  their  way  again  to  the 
Pyrenees,  Septimania7  obeyed  the  Crescent  till  759,  the 
brilliant  career  of  the  Caliphate  of  Cordova  now  began. 

1  These  peoples  were  a  mixture,  not  yet  complete,  of  Carthaginian, 
Roman  and  Greek  with  old-Mauretanian  racial  elements.  See  Chenier, 
Recherches  historiques  stir  les  Ma  tires,  3  v.     The  first  Moorish  landing  in 


226  ISLAM   AND   THE    CRUSADES 

Spain  was  in  May,  711,  the  decisive  3  days'  battle  near  the  Wadi  Becca 
occurring  the  next  July.  The  general  who  headed  the  invasion  was  Tarik, 
from  whom  Gibraltar  took  its  name  [Gibel-al  Tarik  =  '  Tarik's  promon- 
tory '].  Dahn,  K'onige  d.  Germanen,  V,  227,  throws  some  doubt  upon 
Julian's  treason. 

2  See  Ch.  IV,  §1,  and  n.  5.  Justinian  had  recovered  certain  Spanish 
coast-towns  from  the  Visigoths.  They  were  all  now  Gothic  again.  The 
Sueves  had  been  swallowed  up  in  585. 

8  The  conversion  took  place  under  King  Reccared,  586-601,  but  the 
Spanish  church  seems  never  to  have  been  fully  obedient  to  Rome  till  the 
iron  discipline  of  Pope  Innocent  III,  1198-1216,  forced  it  to  be.  See 
Milman,  IX,  vi.  Catholic  position  was  advantageous  on  the  whole,  but 
the  lingering  sympathy  for  Arianism  was  among  the  causes  of  weakness. 

4  At  the  time  of  the  invasions  the  principles  of  heredity  and  election  in 
the  kingship  both  prevailed  in  the  German  nations.  The  Franks  developed 
the  former,  the  Visigoths  the  latter. 

8  This  principality,  locked  in  between  the  Pyrenees  and  the  sea,  was  at 
no  time  in  Musulman  hands.  See  §  16,  also  'Asturias'  in  Encyc.  Brit. 
Asturias  was  the  germ  whence  first  Leon  then  Castile  developed.  The 
heir-apparent  to  the  Spanish  throne  has  been  since  1388  called  the  Prince 
[or  Princess]  of  Asturias,  —  at  present  a  mere  honorary  title  though  for 
centuries  much  more  than  this. 

6  Or  Tours.  The  battle  occurred  on  a  plain  between  Tours  and  Poi- 
tiers but  nearer  the  latter.  Our  accounts  of  affairs  at  that  time  betray  no 
sign  that  Christians  were  aware  of  it  as  a  crisis  for  their  faith.  See  the 
excellent  discussion  by  Kaufmann,  Deutsche  Geschichte,  II,  225  sqq. 

7  Septimania  was  the  belt  of  coast-land  from  the  Pyrenees  nearly  or 
quite  to  the  western  mouth  of  the  Rhone.  With  these  statements  com- 
pare Ch.  V,  §§  2,  3,  and  notes,  also  Milman,  vol.  iii,  84.  During  the 
entire  9th  century  no  point  on  the  Mediterranean  was  safe  from  Moslem 
attack.     Sicily  passed  to  the  crescent  about  850. 

§  7    The  East 

Gibbon,  xxxii,  1  i — I  iii  -     Duruy,  chaps,  vi,  vii.     Weber,  Weltgesck.,  I,  556  sqq. 

Persia  yielded  to  Islam  as  readily  as  Spain,  far  more 
so  than  Africa.  Its  reward  came  with  Abbassid  victory,1 
which  was  essentially  a  resurrection  of  the  old  Persian 
Empire,2  with  a  new  religion  and  with  Arab  chiefs  for 


ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES  227 

kings.  East  Rome  proved  to  be  Islam's  sturdiest  foe.3 
Statements  of  its  weakness  during  this  period  have 
usually  been  much  exaggerated.  Its  strength  in  ex- 
tremity is  rather  the  striking  and  inexplicable  fact. 
Emperor  Heraclius  had  indeed  been  forced,4  so  early  as 
638,  to  abandon  greater  Asia,  and  some  of  his  suc- 
cessors 5  paid  tribute,  but  two  terrible  Ommiad  sieges 
by  both  land  and  sea,  seven  years,  672-9,  and  again 
two  years,  717-19,  were  pressed  against  Constantinople 
in  vain.  So  of  eight  invasions  by  the  great  Haroun 
Alraschid,  786-809.  Severe  winters,  the  ability  and 
valor  of  emperors  and  their  generals,  the  newly  in- 
vented Greek  fire,  and  Byzantine  skill  in  military  de- 
fence equalling  that  of  the  old  Romans,  enabled  the 
city  to  defy  the  art,  desperation  and  countless  hordes6 
with  which  the  Musulmans  attacked.  Note  too,  that  Cor- 
dova now  aided  eastern  Christendom,  as  Abbassids  did 
western.  Haroun  and  Karl  the  Great  were  firm  allies.7 
These  Christian  victories  were  far  more  important  than 
that  of  Poitiers.8  Islam,  bold  and  strong  through  con- 
quest, brought  its  supreme  energy  and  resources  to  the 
onset.  Had  it  succeeded,  Europe  was ,  lost.  If  the 
Saracens,  a  maritime  power  since  the  first  caliph,  647, 
long  kept  the  advantage  at  sea,  Nicephorus  Phocas, 
963-9,  recovered  Crete  and  Antioch,  and  John  Zimi- 
sces,  969-76,  marched  conquering  to  Bagdad  and  the 
Tigris.  It  seems  as  if  but  for  the  Turks  9  Rome  might 
have  won  back  all  her  old  domains. 

1  See  §  4,  n.  2.  It  was  the  purpose  of  the  Sasanian  line  of  Persian 
kings  to  bring  their  empire  back  to  the  limits  and  the  glory  which  it  had 
in  the  days  of  Cyrus  and  Xerxes.  Shapur  [Sapor]  I,  the  second  of  the 
line,  took  the  Emperor  Valerian  prisoner  in  257,  and  Julian  lost  his  life, 


228  ISLAM   AND    THE    CRUSADES 

June  26,  363,  fighting  against  Shapur  II  near  Ctesiphon.  Khosrau  [Chos- 
roes]  I,  '  the  Just,'  531— '79  A.D.,  brought  the  Sasanian  kingdom  to  its 
greatest  extent  and  renown,  ruling  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the  Indus. 
Khosrau  II,  590-628,  took  Jerusalem  in  June,  614,  and,  according  to 
tradition,  carried  the  true  cross  into  captivity.  It  was  sent  back,  and  on 
Sept.  14,  629,  a  date  which  the  Feast  of  the  Elevation  of  the  Holy  Cross 
still  commemorates,  the  emperor  Heraclius,  who  had  re-conquered  most  of 
Roman  Asia,  solemnly  set  it  up  again  in  Jerusalem.  Immediately  after 
this  reverse  and  partly  in  consequence  thereof,  Persia  experienced  dreadful 
internal  contentions  and  civil  wars,  from  which  it  was  still  suffering  when 
the  Moslem  invasion  came.  Best  history  in  English  of  these  events  is  in 
1  Persia,'  Encyc.  Brit. 

3  Einhard,  Vila  Karoli,  c.  16,  calls  Haroun  Alraschid  'king  of  the 
Persians.' 

3  '  We  apply  very  freely  the  words  decay,  decline,  fall,  to  the  Roman 
empire  of  the  4th  and  5th  centuries,  and  effete  is  the  standing  epithet  of 
its  eastern  division,  even  when  the  mighty  Macedonian  dynasty  goes  forth 
conquering  and  to  conquer  from  the  foot  of  Ararat  to  the  foot  of  /Etna. 
The  abiding  life  of  the  eastern  empire  still  seems  to  be  to  many  minds 
the  hardest  of  lessons.'  —  Freeman,  Contemp.  Rev.,  May,  1884.  Even 
Alexius,  at  the  time  of  the  first  crusade,  who  could  vanquish  the  Normans, 
annihilate  the  Patzinaks  and  keep  well  at  bay  the  Turks,  was  no  weakling. 
See  Kugler,  pp.  12,  13. 

*  This  brave  emperor  had  no  sooner  recovered  his  eastern  realms  from 
the  Persian  than  they  were  again  wrested  from  him  by  the  Musulman 
armies.  By  702  the  wave  of  Musulman  conquest  had  reached  China.  In 
711  the  same  caliph  ruled  in  Spain  and  in  Scinde. 

6  Irene,  78o-'97,  and  Nicephorus,  8o2-'i3.  They  had  to  send  the 
tribute  in  coins  bearing  the  image  of  Haroun  himself,  to  whom  it  was 
sent. 

6  The  caliph  Solyman  in  717  commanded  against  Constantinople  an 
army  of  120,000  men  and  a  navy  of  1800  sail.  Haroun's  army  in  806 
numbered  135,000  mercenaries  besides  a  vast  host  of  volunteers,  all 
schooled  in  the  best  military  science. 

7  At  Karl's  imperial  coronation  in  800,  he,  according  to  Einhard,  re- 
ceived from  Haroun  the  keys  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  besides  vesles  et 
aromata  et  ceteras  orientalium  terrarum  opes,  and  other  ingentia  dona, 
including  an  elephant.  —  Vita  Karoli,  c.  16. 

8  This  crisis  being  second  in  importance  for  Christianity  only  to  the 
raising  of  the  siege  of  Vienna  in  1683  by  John  Sobieski.     Not  till  aftei 


ISLAM   AND   THE   CRUSADES  229 

that,  says  Kugler,  •  did  fear  of  the  crescent's  arms  gradually  subside  in 
Europe's  heart.'  For  Nicephorus  Phocas  and  Zimisces,  Gibbon,  xlviii,  Hi 
ad  fin. 

9  See  §  10. 

§  8    The  Civilization  of  Islam 

Gibbon,  lii.  Duruy,  no,  122.  Miltnan,  vol.  ii,  171.  Draper,  xiii.  Kenan,  Aver- 
roes  et  Faverrdisme.  Lane,  Arabian  Society  in  the  Middle  Ages.  Weber,  Welt- 
gesch.  I,  557  sqq. 

From  the  hellenism  now  pervading  the  East,1  the 
Arabs  derived  a  new  intellectual  life  and  zeal,  by  which 
they  considerably  aided  to  advance  the  world's  civiliza- 
tion. In  the  early  middle  age  Spain,  not  Constanti- 
nople, was  the  main  medium  of  classical  light  to  central 
Europe.  Literature,  philosophy,  arts,  sciences  flour- 
ished in  all  Musulman  capitals  before  Christian  Europe 
emerged  from  barbarism.2  So  did  architecture,  music 
and  arabesque  work,  but  neither  sculpture  nor  painting. 
1  We  seem  to  be  indebted  to  Mohammedan  poets  for 
several  forms  of  verse  if  not  for  rhyme.3  However,  in 
literature  at  large,  Islam's  scholars,  so  patient  and  curi- 
ous, did  little  more  than  copy,  comment  and  transmit. 
Study  did  not  set  them  free.  The  peoples  who  obeyed 
the  prophet  were  apparently  incapable  of  attaining  cul- 
ture, literary  or  other,  in  its  finest  forms.  Greek  was 
as  good  as  unknown  even  to  their  learned,  oratory  and 
belles-lettres  they  neglected,  their  history  was  wholly  un- 
critical. 2  Of  philosophers  the  Arabians  cultivated 
Aristotle  alone,  and  only  through  Arabic  translations 
of  Syriac  ones.  In  this  department  also,  Avicenna  and 
Averroes  aside,  there  was  little  originality  though  great 
industry.  It  was  in  Arabic-Latin  versions  that  Aris- 
totle,4 Theophrastus  and  the  other  great  Greeks  whom 


23O  ISLAM   AND   THE    CRUSADES 

they  knew,  were  first  introduced  to  Christian  savans. 
3  The  Arabian  thinkers  were  especially  creative  in 
science,  and  in  astronomy,  geography,  medicine  and 
surgery  they  led  the  world.5  The  observatory  of  Samar- 
cand  long  antedated  the  earliest  in  Europe.  Arabian 
astronomers  calculated  the  length  of  the  earth's  great 
circle,  the  obliquity  of  the  ecliptic,  the  precession  of 
the  equinoxes,  and  perfected  algebra  and  the  Arabic 
notation,  knowledge  of  both  which  they  probably  de- 
rived from  Alexandria.  4  The  Arabians,  famous  invent- 
ors, gave  the  world  paper,  which  doubled  the  value  of 
printing  when  that  came,  arabesque  decoration,  the 
source  of  so  many  modern  forms  of  ornamentation,  dis- 
tillation, a  large  number  of  medicines,  and  many  novel- 
ties in  arms,  agriculture  and  business.  They  are  be- 
lieved to  have  introduced  the  ogive  6  from  West  Asia, 
and  gunpowder  and  the  compass  from  China. 

1  See  Ch.  Ill,  §  7.         2  See  Ch.  VIII,  §  3.         8  See  Ch.  V,  §  5,  n.  2. 

4  Except  the  Karriyopiai  and  the  irepl  ipfirtvdas,  which  existed  in  a 
Latin  translation  by  Boethius  directly  from  the  original. 

5  Draper,  xiii,  is  best  on  this.  Cf.  Gibbon  and  Duruy,  as  above,  and 
Choiseul-Daillecourt,  161  sq.  The  French  chambre  des  comptes  did  not 
adopt  Arabic  figures  till  the  17th  century.    Michelet. 

8  The  pointed  arch  of  Gothic  architecture.  This  origin  of  it  is  how- 
ever not  established.  On  the  compass,  Humboldt,  Cosmos,  vol.  ii.  Chess, 
Gibbon  avers,  came  from  Persia  to  Greece.  In  arms  both  offensive  and 
defensive  the  Moslems  patterned  after  the  Romans,  whom  they  rivalled  in 
the  use  of  them.  On  a  march  their  army  fortified  its  camp  each  night. 
The  art  of  besieging  they  well  understood  and  had  all  the  devices  and 
gear  therefor.  They  used,  with  little  success  to  be  sure,  engineers  in  fire- 
proof clothing,  drilled  to  fight  the  Greek  fire,  also  bows  and  arrows,  spears, 
lances,  greaves,  helmets  and  coats  of  mail.  Infantry  formed  their  main 
arm,  though  their  cavalry  was  choice,  efficient  and  doubly  paid.  Camels 
furnished  them  the  best  means  of  transportation  then  known,  giving  the 
crescent's  armies  in  this  respect  great  advantage  over  the  Roman.     Their 


ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES  2$  I 

order  of  battle  was  the  parallelogram  with  a  longer  side  facing  toward  the 
foe.  Usually  it  awaited  the  hostile  charge,  then  rushed  forward  with 
fury.  The  above  applies  best  to  the  military  system  of  Haroun  Alraschid 
and  his  distinguished  son,  Almamun,  —  to  the  forces  which  East  Rome 
was  called  to  encounter.  Gibbon,  lii,  discusses  the  Greek  fire.  On  the 
whole  topic,  Jahn,  Gesch.  d.  Kriegszvesens  [with  Atlas,  illustrating  modes 
of  offence  and  defence  from  earliest  times]. 


§  9    Its  Decline 

Palmer,  Haroun  Alraschid  [N.  Plutarch  Ser.].     Duruy,  ch.  vii.     Gibbon,  lii. 

Caliphs  often  ruled  well  and  in  government  too  Islam 
contributed  somewhat  to  civilization.1  Spain  especially, 
attained  under  the  crescent  unprecedented  civil  as  well 
as  economical  weal.  Yet  their  form  of  government  was 
vicious,  unstable  through  absolutism,  caliphs  being  to- 
tally unlimited  despots.  However,  the  imposing  empire 
of  Islam  owed  its  fall  not  to  despotism  alone  but  also 
to  its  size  and  to  the  lassitude  and  factions  born  of  its 
wealth  and  success.2  i  Spain,  then  Africa,  revolts,  and 
we  see  Abbassids,  Ommiads  and  Fatimites  in  deadly 
mutual  war,  severally  pretending  to  the  entire  world-cali- 
phate. 2  Each  of  these  dissolves  into  a  number  of  still 
smaller  states,3  at  first  vassal,  then  really,  at  last  nomi- 
nally, independent.  3  Abbassid  sovereignty  is  seized  by 
the  Turkish  royal  guard,  who  dispose  of  the  throne  at 
pleasure.  4  The  caliph,  hitherto  supreme  temporally 
as  well  as  spiritually,  is  now  forced  to  cede  the  temporal 
headship  to  his  vizier,  later  called  the  Emir  al  Omra* 
Between  this  and  nearly  contemporaneous  European 
history  mark  several  instructive  parallels  :  The  offices 
of  vizier  and  maior  domns  were  similar  in  origin,  nature, 
development  and  issue.     In   the  same   particulars   the 


2$2  ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES 

Turkish  Guard  of  Bagdad,  the  African  at  Cordova  and 
the  Mamelukes 5  of  Cairo  resembled  the  praetorians  of 
old  Rome,  the  Normans  and  the  Isaurians  at  Constanti- 
nople. Both  Karl  the  Great6  and  Haroun  divided  their 
empires  among  several  sons.  In  each  case  one  son 
soon  secured  all,  and  in  each  the  empire  underwent  the 
same  process  of  dismemberment. 

1  Eg.,  Amrou  introduced  in  Egypt  direct  taxation.  In  Spain  under  the 
Ommiads,  Christians  retained  freedom  of  worship,  their  own  laws  and 
judges,  and  held  councils  by  the  authority  of  the  caliphs.  The  tribute 
demanded  of  them  was  not  extortionate.  The  Jews  of  Spain  now  fared 
far  better  than  under  the  Visigoths.  Abdurrahman  I  [755],  Hescham  I 
[787],  Abdurrahman  II  [822],  and  Alhakem  II  [961]  were  wise  rulers, 
protectors  of  letters  and  concerned  for  the  weal  of  their  subjects  in  all 
regards.     Duruy,  121. 

2  Scarcely  credible  are  the  accounts  of  the  extent  to  which  taxes,  tribute 
and  booty  had  piled  up  wealth  at  Bagdad,  for  instance.  The  regular  state 
income  of  the  Abbassid  Caliph  approached  $100,000,000  yearly.  There  were 
prodigious  private  fortunes  as  well.  Poets,  artists,  savans,  the  entire  cul- 
ture of  the  hellenized  East  streamed  to  that  golden  capital.  There  came, 
as  in  ancient  Rome,  love  of  ease,  effeminacy,  dislike  for  the  stern  life 
which  had  made  the  old  Moslems  irresistible.  The  thoughtful  saw  too 
that  most  of  the  wars  were  purely  personal.  Apathy  resulted  quickest  in 
Persia,  where  the  people  had  accepted  Islam  easiest.  For  100  years 
native  Arabs  were  the  leaders  and  the  kernel  of  all  Moslem  armies,  but 
more  and  more  mercenaries  were  introduced,  and  even  slave-soldiers. 
Motassem,  the  eighth  Abbassid  caliph,  dying  in  842,  had  commanded  an 
army  of  70,000  Mameluke  slaves. 

8  Thus  in  Spain  the  racial  groups  in  the  army  of  the  original  invasion, 
whose  mutual  jealousies  alone  gave  Martell  the  victory  at  Poitiers,  seem 
never  to  have  become  fully  harmonized.  The  arrival  of  the  Ommiad 
Abdurrahman  [§  4,  notes  1,  2]  occasioned  a  fierce  civil  war.  He  soon 
secured  the  throne  of  Cordova  and  ruled  in  considerable  quiet,  though 
hardly  a  year  free  from  rebellions.  In  777  three  of  his  chiefs  appeared  in 
Karl  the  Great's  Diet  at  Paderborn  to  secure  his  intervention  against  their 
roaster.  Abdurrahman  held  his  own,  and  his  son,  Hescham  I,  took  the 
'  fcnsive,  crossing  the  Pyrenees  and  plundering  far  and  wide,  but  making 


ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES  233 

no  permanent  conquest.  Even  he  however,  and  all  his  successors,  had 
the  quelling  of  insurrections  for  a  constant  task,  which  greatly  lightened 
the  Christian  conquest  [§  16,  n.  3].  On  the  disruption  of  the  Abbassid 
power,  see  §  10,  and  on  the  whole  process,  Gibbon  and  Duruy  as  above. 

4  'Prince  of  princes.'  The  term  vizier  continued  in  use  also.  The 
sultans  had  their  viziers. 

5  These  were  a  body-guard  of  Turkish  slaves,  who  rose  to  power  over 
their  masters  and  became  the  rulers  of  Egypt.  Their  successors  still  held 
the  land  at  Napoleon's  arrival  in  1 798. 

6  But  see  Ch.  V,  §  3,  n.  2. 

§  10    Jerusalem 

Gibbon,  lvii.     Sybel,  Gesck.  d.  ersten  Kreuzzuges,  157  sq. 

Just  as  the  power  of  Bagdad  was  sinking,  a  new 
enemy  of  the  cross  appeared  in  the  East, — the  Seljuk 
Turks,  for  whom  the  Byzantines  themselves  had  fatally 
prepared  the  way  by  ruining  the  Christian  kingdom  of 
Armenia.  The  Turks  rapidly  got  possession  of  all 
western  Asia.  Togrul  Beg,  Alp  Arslan  and  his  son 
Malek  Shah,  each  occupied  the  post  of  Emir  al  Omra, 
succeeding  to  the  old  sway  of  the  Bagdad  caliphs.1 
Antioch,  also  Jerusalem,  which  had  been  for  the  cen- 
tury previous  subject  to  the  Fatimites  of  Egypt,  fell 
into  Turkish  hands,  1086.  On  the  death  of  Malek 
Shah,  1092,  his  empire  broke  in  pieces2  and  Nicaea  was 
made  the  capital  of  the  Turkish  emirat  of  Roum,  which 
included  most  of  Asia  Minor.  Musulman  soldiers  en- 
camped in  sight  of  Constantinople  itself.  Pilgrimage 
to  the  Holy  Land,  already  an  old  custom,  was  especially 
brisk  during  the  eleventh  century.3  A  single  company 
numbered  three  thousand,  another,  starting  in  1064, 
seven  thousand.  Every  road  to  the  East  was  thronged, 
every  ship  had  its  load  of   pilgrims.      Christians   had 


234  ISLAM    AND   THE   CRUSADES 

suffered  somewhat  under  Hakem,4  but  in  general  the 
Fatimites  had  treated  them  with  mildness.  Turkish 
conquest  changed  this.  Violence  was  now  not  uncom- 
mon, churches  were  defiled  or  destroyed,  tribute  being 
mercilessly  wrung  from  every  pilgrim  before  he  could 
enter  Jerusalem.  Many,  destitute,  were  forced  to  turn 
back  without  seeing  the  holy  places,  some  starved  while 
waiting  for  succor. 

1  The  Abbassids,  that  is.  The  caliph-office  remained  still,  but  relig- 
ious only  and  no  longer  possessing  any  influence. 

2  Producing  the  various  sultanies  of  Iran,  Kerman,  Aleppo,  Damascus, 
and  Roum  or  Iconium.  *  Roum'  is  the  islamized  form  of  the  syllable  '  Rom ' 
=  Rome,  seen  now  in  Roumelia  and  Roumania,  also  in  El  Roum,  the 
Moslem  name  for  Turkey  even  to-day.  The  office  of  sultan,  [=  king, 
lord,  or  master]  was  of  Turkish  origin,  being  invented  for  Mahmud  the 
Great,  whose  career  Gibbon  so  interestingly  recites  in  Hi.  In  1061  oc- 
curred the  decisive  battle  of  Manzikert,  where  the  emperor  Romanus 
Diogenes  was  defeated  and  made  prisoner  by  Alp  Arslan. 

8  It  had  begun  long  before  iooo,  quickened  by  the  expectation  then 
nearly  universal,  of  the  end  of  the  world  when  a  thousand  years  from  the 
Lord's  advent  should  have  elapsed.  Martin  in  vol.  iv  well  discusses  the 
state  of  the  church  at  the  time  of  the  crusades.  We  must  remember  that 
these  were  in  the  thought  of  the  times  only  armed  pilgrimages  and  not 
unlike  many  other  movements  not  now  connected  with  them.  Gregory  VII 
had  proposed  a  sort  of  crusade,  promising  to  lead  it  himself,  and  had 
actually  assembled  50,000  men  [Gregorovius  IV,  71].  v.  Sybel,  168  sq., 
thinks  that  Hildebrand  intended  the  forcible  reduction  of  the  eastern 
church.     So  hardly  two  authors  agree  as  to  the  number  of  the  crusades. 

4  The  Fatimite  ruler.  He  was  not  an  orthodox  Musulman  but  a  pre- 
tender to  revelations  on  his  own  account,  as  if  hoping  to  be  a  second 
Mohammed. 


islam  and  the  crusades  235 

§  1 1     The  Crusades  : 1  Occasion  and  Meaning 

Guizot,  Civilization  in  Europe,  viii.  Milman,  VII,  vi.  Duruy,  ch.  xix.  Sybel,  as  at 
last  §,  145  sqq.  Kugler,  chaps,  i,  ii.  Choiseul-Daillecourt,  pp.  3-36.  Michelet, 
France,  bk.  iv,  ch.  iii. 

With  desire  for  free  way  to  Jerusalem  wrought  three 
other  motives,  producing  a  crusading  spirit  which  was 
soon  a  frenzy,  i  The  military.  Valor,  always  a  marked 
trait  of  Teutonic  peoples,  had  been  evoked  afresh  and 
invigorated  by  the  advent  of  the  Normans  2  and  by  con- 
flicts with  the  Avars.  Hence  their  incessant  mutual 
wars,  private  and  public,  for  which  later  Carolingian 
times  gave  such  opportunity.  Prospect  of  a  campaign 
against  a  common  foe  offered  tenfold  inspiration  to  this 
martial  longing.  2  The  ascetic.  The  church  consid- 
ered hard  pilgrimages  to  saints'  tombs  and  other  sacred 
spots  specially  efficient  means  of  salvation.  If  to  the 
Holy  Land  they  were  pronounced  trebly  so  on  account 
of  the  extra  time,  toil,  expense  and  danger.  3  The 
religious-political.  The  crusades  are  to  be  understood 
as  the  culminating  phase  in  that  long  battle  between 
the  two  would-be  world-religions,  Christianity  and  Islam. 
For  four  centuries  Christianity  had  been  on  the  defen- 
sive in  Europe,  under  the  yoke  in  Asia.  In  parts  of 
Africa  it  had  been  crushed  out.  Even  Karl  the  Great 
failed  to  keep  the  Ebro  his  boundary.  The  Mediterra- 
nean obeyed  chiefly  the  Crescent,  Constantinople  was 
tottering,  unless  a  great  blow  were  now  struck,  Chris- 
tendom must  fall  prey  to  the  neo-Musulmans.  The 
sharpest  immediate  spurs  to  action  were  the  cry  of  the 
eastern  emperor,  the  inspired  appeal  of  Pope  Urban  II3 
in  1095,  at  Piacenza  and  especially  at  Clermont,  where 


236  ISLAM    AND    THE   CRUSADES 

thousands  instantly  responded,  and  the  preaching  of 
Peter  the  Hermit.  The  last  it  is  true  was  far  less  in- 
fluential than  usually  stated,  the  story  of  Peter's  journey 
to  Jerusalem  having  been  disproved  by  the  newest 
study  of  the  sources.  Peter  did  not  arouse  Urban  but 
Urban  Peter.4 

1  First  Crusade,  ic>96-'99. 
Second   "         n^"j-^. 


Third      " 

n89-'92. 

Fourth    " 

I202-'04. 

Fifth       ■ 

I228-'29. 

Sixth       " 

1 248-'  54. 

Seventh  " 

1270. 

Jerusalem  taken  1099,  lost  1187,  regained  1229,  finally  lost  1244. 

2  v.  Sybel,  175  sqq.,  makes  the  Normans  emphatically  the  foremost 
representatives  of  the  crusading  interest,  and  gives  an  instructive  account 
of  their  character  and  of  its  influence  upon  Europe.     Cf.  Ch.  V,  §  9,  n.  3. 

8  Milinan,  vol.  iii,  517  sqq.,  Gibbon,  lviii.  Adhemar  of  Puy,  Urban's 
legate  and  styled  by  him  dux  belli,  was  the  first  bishep  to  take  the  cross, 
and  Raymond  of  Toulouse  the  first  distinguished  layman. 

4  So  v.  Sybel,  195  sqq.,  and  Kugler,  ii.  Their  denial  of  Peter's  visit  to 
Jerusalem  according  to  the  story  universally  believed  till  v.  Sybel  wrote,  is 
based  on  the  history  of  Anna  Comnena,  lib.  x,  ed.  Bonn.  II,  29.  She 
was  the  daughter  of  the  Emperor  Alexius,  who,  doubtless  in  her  hearing, 
had  had  long  conferences  with  Peter  on  his  arrival  at  Constantinople  just 
before  the  first  crusaders  [see  next  §].  Not  only  is  her  account  silent 
regarding  Peter's  alleged  visit  to  and  vision  i  1  Jerusalem,  hut  it  expressly 
states  that  although  having  made  a  pilgrimage  f;>r  the  purpose  he  had 
failed  to  reach  that  city,  his  way  being  blocked  by  the  Turks,  v.  Sybel, 
188  sqq.,  makes  it  nearly  certain  that  the  exalted  report  of  Peter's  agency 
originated  in  a. desire  to  glorify  asceticism  at  the  expense  of  papal  au- 
thority. It  is  first  published  by  Albert  of  Aix-la-Chapelle,  early  in  the 
1 2th  century,  and  repeated  by  William  of  Tyre  about  the  middle  of  the 
same.  Cf.  on  this,  Hagenmeyer,  La  vie  de  Pierre  Permite,  and  de  Marsy's 
criticism  of  Hagenmeyer's  work  in  Pierre  Vermite,  son  histoire  et  sa 
ligende. 


islam  and  the  crusades  237 

§  12    The  First  Crusade 

Gibbon,  lviii.  Kitchin,  France,  vol.  i,  210  sqq.  Duruy,  ch.  xix.  Tasso,  Jerusalem 
Delivered.  Kugler,  ii,  also  his  art.  '  Gottfried  de  Bouillon?  in  Hist.  Taschenbuch, 
Folge  vi,  8ter  Jahrg.  Freitag,  Bilder,  I,  10.  Raumer,  bk.  i.  Michelet,  France, 
bk.  iv,  chaps,  iii,  iv. 

The  pious  enthusiasm  verged  upon  insanity.  Hordes 
of  old  men,  women  and  children  from  all  Western  Eu- 
rope left  their  homes  and  set  out,  utterly  unprepared, 
for  Palestine.1  Some  hundreds  of  thousands  of  these, 
Peter  among  them,  formed  the  van  of  the  crusade,  sub- 
sisting by  robbery,  especially  of  Jews.  Not  one  of  them 
reached  his  destination,  though  a  few  crossed  the  Helles- 
pont, to  be  hewn  down  by  the  Moslem  sword.  Of  the 
crusaders  proper,  not  less  than  three  hundred  thousand 
in  number,  Godfrey  of  Bouillon,  that  true  warrior-saint 
who  almost  alone  supported  the  dignity  of  the  expedi- 
tion, was  silently  recognized  as  captain.  A  multitude 
of  knights,  the  bravest  in  Europe,  were  with  him,  all 
either  of  Norman  or  of  Romance  stock,  few  Germans, 
and  no  king,2  having  as  yet  taken  the  cross.  Three 
different  companies  by  as  many  different  routes3  reached 
Constantinople,  1096.  After  long  negotiations  with  the 
crafty  Emperor  Alexius,  in  which  he  induced  the  leaders 
to  swear  fealty  to  him,  the  army  crossed  into  Roum. 
Detained  a  little  by  the  siege  of  Nicaea  and  the  battle 
of  Dorylseum,4  1097,  and  by  dissensions  at  Tarsus,5  hor- 
ribly decimated  by  heat  and  privations  upon  the  desert 
road,  they  invested  Antioch.  Here,  successively  be- 
siegers, victorious  (1098)  and  besieged,  they  lost  and 
suffered  most  severely,  as  much  from  success  as  from 
defeat.6  Less  than  fifty  thousand  reached  Jerusalem, 
1099.     This  city,  which  had  been  now  for  three  years 


238  ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES 

again  in  Fatimite  hands,  was  taken  by  storm,  July  16, 
the  Musulmans  being  ruthlessly  slaughtered.  Godfrey, 
refusing  to  be  king,  '  to  wear  a  crown  of  gold  where  the 
King  of  kings  had  borne  one  of  thorns,'  but  made  De- 
fender and  Baron  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  gave  Palestine 
a  governmental  organization  exactly  upon  the  Norman 
feudal  model.7 

1  Moving  in  several  companies,  one  under  Peter,  another  under  Walter 
the  Penniless,  a  third  under  Emico,  a  fourth  carrying  a  banner  whereon  a 

"goose  and  a  goat  were  figured,  signs,  perhaps,  of  lingering  Gnostic  and 
Paulician  heresy  [§  16,  n.  2].  These  marauders  evoked  hostility  all  the 
way,  taking  from  Christians  as  from  Jews.  At  Constantinople  Alexius  lost 
no  time  in  conveying  the  remnant  of  them  to  the  Asiatic  shore,  where  their 
bones  were  used  by  the  first  crusaders  proper  as  material  for  fortification 
in  the  siege  of  Nicaea.  Even  before  getting  out  of  France,  the  poor  dupes 
would  cry,  at  sight  of  each  new  city  upon  their  march, '  Is  not  that  Jerusalem? ' 

2  Henry  IV  of  Germany  was  excommunicate  and  at  war  with  his  rival, 
his  sons  and  his  vassals.  Philip  I  was  excommunicated  by  Urban  II  at  the 
Council  of  Cfermont  itself  [Ch.  V,  §  16,  n.  3].  Spain  had  its  crusade  at 
home.  William  Rufus  was  busy  with  the  unsettled  affairs  of  England. 
Godfrey  was  the  duke  of  lower  Lorraine,  and  was  accompanied  by  his 
brothers,  Eustace  and  Baldwin.  He  had  fought  for  Henry  IV  [being  a 
vassal  of  the  empire]  against  the  pope,  hewing  his  way  into  Rome,  but 
now  wished  to  do  penance  therefor.  He  and  his  brothers  commanded 
some  80,000  infantry,  10,000  horse.  Other  prominent  leaders  [Gibbon, 
lviii]  were :  1  Raymond  of  Toulouse,  a  warrior  old  and  wise  but  haughty, 
greedy  and  obstinate,  with  a  train  of  100,000  men.  2  Duke  Robert  of 
Normandy,  eldest  son  of  the  Conqueror,  and  like  his  father  a  stout  and 
valiant  fighter,  who  had  mortgaged  his  lands  to  his  brother,  William  Rufus, 
for  money  wherewith  to  go  crusading.  At  Dorykeum,  by  the  Ifrin  bridge 
in  front  of  Antioch,  and  with  the  provision-train  from  the  Orontes  mouth 
[Cox,  61],  his  sword  decided  the  victory.  3  Bohemond,  son  of  Robert 
Guiscard,  king  of  Naples  and  Sicily.  He  had  fought  Alexius  already  at 
Durazzo  and  Larissa,  and  probably  viewed  the  crusade  as  a  means  to  that 
victory  over  him  which  those  battles  had  failed  to  yield.  4  Tancred, 
Bohemond's  cousin,  after  Godfrey  the  most  beautiful  character  of  the 
crusade.  5  Stephen,  count  of  Chartres,  Blois  and  Troves,  learned  and 
eloquent,  said  to  have  owned  365  castles.     6  Hugh,  count  of  Vermandois, 


ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES  239 

brother  of  Philip  I.  7  Robert,  count  of  Flandre.  Notwithstanding 
Scott's  novel  bearing  his  name  it  is  not  certain  that  Count  Robert  of  Paris 
went  upon  the  crusade. 

8  Those  from  the  north,  under  Godfrey,  marched  through  Germany, 
Hungary  and  Bulgaria,  Raymond  through  Lombardy  and  Dalmatia,  Hugh, 
Stephen  and  the  two  Roberts,  down  the  peninsula  of  Italy  to  Apulia, 
whence,  like  Bohemond  and  Tancred,  they  crossed  to  Epirus  and  traversed 
this  land  and  Thessaly.  On  the  numbers  in  this  crusade,  Gibbon,  vol.  v 
[ed.  Milm.],  572.  Count  Baldwin's  chaplain  wrote  that  six  million  in  all 
left  the  West.  Incredible.  There  were  possibly  one  million,  including 
camp-followers. 

4  Nicaea  surrendered  to  Alexius,  not  to  the  crusaders,  showing  that  the 
emperor  had  an  understanding  with  the  infidels.  The  battle  at  Dorylasum 
was  on  July  4,  1097.  On  the  arms  and  tactics  of  the  crusaders,  Gibbon, 
lviii,  Ferrario,  Rom  ami  di  Cavalleria,  4  v.  [cuts  and  dissertations  on 
chivalry],  Jahn,  Kriegswesen,  'Arms  and  Armor'  in  Encyc.  Brit.,  'Armor ' 
in  Am.  Cyclopaedia,  and  cuts  on  pp.  29,  30,  41  and  78  of  Kugler.  At 
time  of  first  ctusade  the  square-topped  helmet  of  the  Templars  with  its 
door-visor  opening  laterally  had  mostly  given  way  to  a  cone-shaped  iron 
skull-cap,  without  visor  [Kugler,  41].  Plate-armor  for  gauntlets,  greaves, 
cuirass  and  shoulder-pieces  had  begun  to  be  used  over  the  old  hauberk  or 
coat  of  chain-and-ring  mail,  but  some  still  fought  in  casque  and  hauberk 
only.  By  end  of  crusades  the  full  casque,  with  its  band,  front,  visor  and 
head-piece  had  come  in,  as  well  as  complete  plate-armor.  The  lance  was 
the  standard  weapon,  its  shaft  18  feet  long  and  enlarged  at  the  butt. 
Each  knight  carried  also  a  sword  about  30  inches  in  length,  and  a  battle- 
axe  with  a  4  or  5  foot  handle.  Every  knight  had  his  esquire,  mounted, 
and  4,  5  or  6  crossbow-men  besides,  making  up  the  complete  outfit  of  the 
'  lance.'  Contrary  to  some  authorities,  the  buckler  was  employed  in  the  first 
crusade,  but  made  smaller  than  later.  Christian  armor  was  heavier  than 
Saracen,  which  closely  resembled  it  [Kugler,  78],  and  increased  in  weight 
from  the  earlier  to  the  later  crusades.  The  knight  rode  a  palfrey  till  battle 
was  imminent,  then  donned  his  gear  and  mounted  his  '  high  horse.'  The 
Turks  rode  small,  nimble  beasts,  and  outdid  their  enemies  in  rapidity  of 
movement  and  complexity  of  evolutions. 

5  Baldwin  and  Tancred  took  this  city,  then  quarrelled  over  it.  Tancred 
retained  it,  Baldwin  pushing  east  to  the  conquest  of  Edessa,  where  he 
founded  a  kingdom  which  stood  till  1146.  From  Dorylseum  to  Tarsus  the 
army  had  hard  work  to  subsist.  Many  horses  died,  knights  being  forced 
to  go  afoot.     Godfrey  and  Raymond,  ill,  were  carried  in  litters. 


24O  ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES 

6  Famine  was  upon  them  while  besieging  Antioch,  relieved  only  by 
foraging  expeditions  and  by  food  brought  with  difficulty  from  ships  at  the 
mouth  of  the  Orontes.  Several  times  they  were  nearly  forced  to  raise  the 
siege,  armies  being  sent  against  them  from  Aleppo  and  elsewhere.  The 
Fatimites  in  Jerusalem  offered  them  peaceful  entrance  there,  which  they 
declined,  bent  on  making  it  a  Christian  city.  Having  gotten  possession  of 
Antioch,  only  by  stratagem,  they  were  soon  closely  besieged  there  by  Ker- 
boga,  Prince  of  Mosul,  who  had  been  sent  by  the  Abbassid  authorities  at 
Bagdad  to  aid  the  troops  of  Roum.  Famine  was  now  terrible.  Stephen 
of  lilois  and  many  others  escaped  from  the  city  and  went  home.  Cats, 
dogs  and  Turks  were  eaten.  Godfrey  killed  his  last  war-horse  for  food. 
At  length,  animated  by  the  supposed  discovery  beneath  a  church  in  Antioch 
of  the  spear-head  which  had  pierced  the  Lord's  side  upon  the  cross 
[Raumer,  vol.  i,  2d  Beilage  is  on  this  legend]  they  attack  Kerboga  with 
success,  June  28,  1098,  raising  the  siege  and  opening  way  for  advance 
upon  Jerusalem  at  their  leisure.  Breakenridge,  The  Crusades  and  other 
Poems,  recounts  scenes  at  Dorylaeum  and  Antioch.  Read  also  Tasso, 
Jerusalem  Delivered. 

7  Ch.  VI,  §  2. 

§  13     The  Second  and  Third 

Gibbon,  lix.  Milman,  vol.  iv,  250  sqq.,  447.  Sybel,  Kl.  hist.  Sckriften,  1  essay  in 
each  v.  Kugler,  v-vii.  Raumer,  vol.  i,  496-547,  vol.  ii,  bk.  v.  Martin,  France, 
vol.  iv.     Morrison,  L.  of  St.  Bernard. 

Edessa  having  been  in  1 146  taken  from  the  Chris- 
tians and  sacked,  Saint  Bernard  preaches  a  second 
crusade.  Emperor  Conrad  III '  of  Germany  and  King 
Louis  VII  of  France  march.  The  German  and  also 
much  of  the  French  army  was  annihilated  in  Asia 
Minor.  Antioch  was  indeed  reached  and  Damascus 
attacked,  but  these  efforts,  like  all  the  rest  of  this  cru- 
sade, proved  wholly  vain.  The  third  crusade,  occasioned 
by  the  fall  of  Acre  and  of  Jerusalem  in  11 87,  was  ren- 
dered famous  by  the  participation  in  it  of  Richard  Coeur 
de  Lion,  Philip  Augustus,  Frederic  Barbarossa,  who  was 
drowned  upon  the  way,  and  Saladin.     Genoa,  Pisa  and 


ISLAM   AND    THE   CRUSADES  24 1 

Venice  aided  by  sea.  Some  success  was  realized :  Cy- 
prus taken,  also  Acre,  and  the  coast  hence  to  Joppa 
ceded  to  the  Christians,  with  the  privilege  of  visiting 
the  holy  places.  But  Philip  and  Richard  quarrelled, 
attacks  upon  Jerusalem  led  by  the  latter  were  twice 
repulsed,  and  this  savage  king  on  his  return  from  Pal- 
estine suffered  shipwreck  off  Aquileia,  as  well  as  long 
imprisonment2  in  Germany,  from  which  he  escaped 
only  by  the  payment  of  an  enormous  ransom. 

1  Conrad  III  was  uncle  to  Frederic  Barbarossa,  his  successor.  On 
Louis  VII,  cf.  Ch.  VI,  §  17,  and  note  2.  Many  of  their  soldiers  accused 
Christ  of  having  deceived  them  and  became  Mohammedans. 

2  He  was  first  arrested  by  Leopold  of  Austria,  who  handed  him  over 
to  Emperor  Henry  VI,  Barbarossa's  son.  This  treatment  is  usually  ex- 
plained as  revenge  for  Richard's  insult  to  Austria  at  Acre,  where  he  is  said 
to  have  had  the  Austrian  banner  trailed  in  the  dirt,  but  is  probably  due 
more  to  his  alliance  with  the  Guelph  party  in  Germany.  The  ransom 
was  ,£1 00,000,  double  the  yearly  revenue  of  the  crown.  It  was  raised  by 
(1)  an  aid  of  20s.  on  the  knight's  fee,  (2)  tallage  on  towns  and  on  the 
king's  demesne,  (3)  hideage  and  carucage,  land-taxes,  taking  the  place  of 
the  Dancgeld,  and  (4)  a  quarter  of  all  the  movable  property  of  every 
person  in  the  realm.  Stubbs,  I,  501.  The  '  Saladin  tithe'  had  been  laid 
earlier,  in  1188.  It  was  the  first  tax  in  England  upon  personal  property. 
The  same  tax  was  laid  in  France  by  Philip  Augustus,  a  tenth  of  all  the 
movables  and  revenues  of  such  as  did  not  take  the  cross.  See  Blanqui, 
n.  to  ch.  xiv. 

§  14    The  Fourth 

Gibbon,  lx,  lxi.  Milman,  IX,  vii.  Pears,  Fall  of  Constantinople:  Story  of  4th  Crusade. 
Kugler,  viii.  Sismondi,  Italian  Republics,  II,  iv.  Montesquieu,  Grandeur  and 
Declension,  ch.  xx*iii.     Raumer,  vol.  iii,  41-98. 

Roused  by  the  call  of  the  powerful  Pope  Innocent  III, 
a  new  body  of  crusaders  sails  from  Venice  in  1202 
under  the  aged  Doge  Dandolo.  Neither  king  nor  com- 
mon soldiers  accompanying,  this  was  even  more  than 


242  ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES 

the  first,  a  knights'  crusade.  After  pausing  at  the 
prayer  of  the  Venetians  to  capture  Zara,  the  leaders 
agreed  to  turn  aside  to  reinstate  the  just  deposed  An- 
geli 1  at  Constantinople  instead  of  attacking  Egypt, 
their  first  plan.  This  object  was  accomplished,  but  as 
the  Angeli  could  not  fulfil  their  promises  concerning 
money  and  the  reunion  of  the  eastern  church  with  the 
western,  the  city  was  retaken,  all  revolt  within  sup- 
pressed, and  a  Latin  empire  erected,  1204.  Great  bar- 
barity was  displayed  by  these  crusaders,  to  whom  is 
partly  due  a  conflagration  destroying  much  valuable  lit- 
erature. This  great  'buccaneering  expedition,'  really 
not  a  crusade  at  all,  well  reveals  those  base  motives 
from  which  no  one  even  of  the  genuine  crusades  was 
free.2  '  That  a  Christian  force,  assembled  for  the  pur- 
pose of  fighting  the  infidels,  should  turn  its  arms  against 
the  most  important  Christian  city  of  the  time,  is  an  act 
of  unparalleled  baseness,  nor  can  anything  be  conceived 
more  deliberately  mean  than  the  treaty  by  which  the 
spoil  of  the  empire  was  partitioned  beforehand  between 
the  nations  who  took  part  in  the  attack.'3  Venice 
received  many  islands  and  long  reaches  of  coast,  the 
Marquis  of  Montferrat  became  king  of  Macedonia,  and 
French  dukes  or  counts  had  seats  at  Athens,  in  Naxos, 
Asia  Minor  and  Achaia.  Greek  kingdoms  were  formed 
at  Trebizond  and  Nicaea,  the  latter  of  which,  under 
Michael  Palaeologus,  conquered  Constantinople  again  in 
1 261,  putting  an  end  to  the  Latin  rule.4  But  the  city 
never  recovered  its  old  power. 

1  Isaac  II,  Angelus,  of  the  Conineni  family,  came  to  the  Byzantine 
throne  in  1185,  but  was  supplanted  by  his  brother,  Alexius  III,  in  1 195. 
Isaac  II  and  his  son,  Alexius  IV,  besought  help  from  the  West,  promising 


ISLAM   AND    THE   CRUSADES  243 

great  rewards  and  the  submission  of  their  church  to  the  pope.  Constan- 
tinople once  in  their  hands,  they  laid  new  and  crushing  taxes  as  means  of 
fulfilling  their  contract.  Revolt  ensues,  the  upstart  Murzuphlus  is  made 
emperor,  and  the  Latins  return,  this  time  to  remain.  Great  treasure  was 
captured,  $4,046,000  being  carried  into  one  church  for  apportionment. 
The  Venetians  were  paid  $809,200  ferriage-money. 

2  In  his  letter  to  the  count  of  Flanders  Alexius  cited  as  motives  to  go 
upon  the  crusade,  amor  auri  et  argenti  et  pulcherrimarum  foeminarum 
voluptas.     Blanqui. 

3  Tozer,  s.  v.  '  Greece,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.,  —  a  very  good  brief  history  of 
the  eastern  empire  in  these  times.  For  a  fuller  discussion,  see  the  appro- 
priate chapters  in  Finlay,  Hopf,  and  Hertzberg. 

4  This  breaking  up  of  the  empire  scaled  its  doom.  As  soon  as  the 
Latins  were  driven  forth  the  menaces  of  the  Turks  began  anew  and  never 
ceased  till  Constantinople  fell  into  their  hands,  1453.  During  the  Latin 
sway  in  the  East  the  Osmanli  or  Ottoman  Turks  had  become  the  Moham- 
medan van.  They  came  from  the  Chinese  border,  under  their  chief,  Erto- 
grul,  and  entered  the  service  of  the  Seljuk  Sultan.  The  name  is  from 
Othman  [pron.  '  Osman '],  Ertogrul's  son  and  successor.  Othman's  son, 
Orchan,  threw  off  the  Seljuk  overlordship,  united  most  of  the  Turks  of 
Asia  Minor  under  his  rule,  and  left  to  the  emperors  at  Constantinople  and 
Trebizond  nothing  but  a  few  coast-towns.  In  1356  the  Ottomans  seized 
Gallipolis  in  the  Thracian  Chersonesus,  in  Europe,  whence  by  sure  steps 
they  advanced  to  the  Byzantine  throne  in  less  than  a  century.  Moslem 
historians  regard  the  Sultans  of  Turkey  as  the  regular  successors  ['  Sultans 
el  Roum  ']  of  the  long  line  of  emperors  from  Constantine  the  Great  to 
Constantine  XII,  who,  with  his  capital,  succumbed  to  Mahomet  II,  1453. 
See  on  this,  Freeman,  Turks  in  Europe;  Creasy,  H.  of  the  Ottoman 
Turks,  2  v.;  Gibbon,  lxiv  and  the  remaining  chaps.,  esp.  lxviii;  Wallace, 
Conquest  of  Constantinople  by  the  Moslems. 

§  15     The  Remaining  Eastern  Crusades 

Milntan,  X,  i,  iii,  XI,  i.     Duruy,  ch.  xx.    Raumer,  bk.  viii,  1.    Michelet,  France, 
bk.  iv,  ch.  viii.     Martin,  vol.  v.     Kugler,  ix-xi. 

Meantime  Palestine  was  piteously  imploring  help  from 
the  West,  seconded  by  Innocent,  who  never  ceased  to 
condemn  the  bad  faith  which  had  disgraced  the  last 
crusade.      King  Andrew  II  of  Hungary  with  a  large 


244  ISLAM   AND   THE    CRUSADES 

train  went  to  Palestine  in  1217,  but  returned  at  once, 
accomplishing  nothing.  The  next  year  John  of  Brienne, 
elected  King  of  Jerusalem,  proceeded  to  Egypt1  and 
took  Damietta.  The  Musulmans  offered,  upon  cessa- 
tion of  hostilities,  to  cede  Jerusalem  and  all  Palestine, 
but  the  papal  legate  would  not  treat  with  infidels. 
More  properly  named  the  fifth  crusade  is  the  expedition 
of  the  excommunicated  Frederic  II,2  in  which,  1229, 
he  secured  by  negotiation  what  arms  had  long  been 
attempting  in  vain,  the  possession  of  Jerusalem,  with 
Bethlehem,  Nazareth  and  Sidon.  Frederic's  ten-year 
truce  with  the  Saracens,  who  were  now  in  terror  of  the 
approaching  Tartars 3  or  Mongols,  the  pope  denounced 
and  repudiated.  Jerusalem  was  lost  again  and  finally 
in  1 244.*  The  sixth  and  seventh  crusades  derive  their 
sole  interest  from  the  presence  of  Saint  Louis.  The 
sixth,  a  large  and  chivalrous  army,  again  makes  Egypt 
its  objective  and  attacks  Damietta.  This  city  was  taken 
a  second  time  in  1249,  but  in  advancing  toward  Cairo, 
after  terrific  losses  from  pestilence,  Louis  and  his  entire 
host  were  cut  off  from  their  base  and  made  prisoners. 
The  king,  ransomed  at  enormous  cost,5  retreated  to 
Palestine  with  6,000  men,  and  after  four  years  spent 
there,  reached  France  in  1254.  Sixteen  years  later  the 
saintly  monarch  took  the  cross  again.  Persuaded  by 
his  selfish  brother,  Charles  of  Anjou,  now  King  of 
Naples,  to  lead  his  army  against  Tunis,  he  there  ended 
his  pure  life  and  with  it  the  eastern  crusades  in  1270. 
Thus  these  fateful  movements  were  terminated,  as  they 
were  begun,  by  France.  In  1291  Acre  was  stormed  by 
the  Mamelukes  and  the  Christians  evacuated  their  last 
possessions  in  the  Holy  Land. 


ISLAM   AND    THE   CRUSADES  245 

1  Because  the  Egyptian  Saracens  were  the  defenders  of  Jerusalem. 
Hence  the  sixth  crusade  also  directs  its  attack  thither.  St.  Francis  was  in 
Egypt  with  de  Brienne's  army.  He  suffered  himself  to  be  taken  prisoner 
that  he  might  preach  the  gospel  to  the  Mohammedans.  He  even  appeared 
before  the  Sultan,  who  heard  him  with  respect. 

«  Ch.  V,  §  1 9)  n.  4. 

3  On  the  marches  and  conquests  of  these  ferocious  hordes,  see  Gibbon, 
lxiv;  for  those  of  Timur  [Tamerlane],  ibid.  lxv.  '  Jenghis-Khan  '  was  his 
title  =  '  chief  of  chiefs ' ;  his  name  was  Temoudjin.  His  following  was 
a  mighty  agglomeration  of  Mongol  tribes,  each  under  its  khan,  without 
civilization,  history  or  close  organization.  Though  under  a  domineering 
priesthood  they  had  no  deep  religiousness  such  as  the  early  Mohammedans 
possessed,  were  in  fact  scarcely  above  the  level  of  fetish-worship.  Jenghis- 
Khan,  in  whose  campaigns  five  million  men  perished,  died  about  1225, 
but  a  son  carried  forward  his  conquests.  Killing  and  burning,  always  their 
wont,  they  swept  through  Russia  to  Poland  and  Hungary.  Opposed  at 
Liegnitz  in  their  advance  toward  Germany  they  defeated  their  foe,  filling 
nine  sacks  with  the  right  ears  of  the  slain  [Gibbon].  Dismay  seized 
Europe.  'What  will  become  of  us?'  asked  Blanche,  his  mother,  of  St. 
Louis.  The  good  king,  not  too  pious  or  too  frightened  to  joke,  replied : 
'  Why,  either  they  will  send  us  to  heaven  or  we  them  to  TartarieJ  which 
name  might  mean  '  hell '  or  '  Chinese  Tartary,'  whence  the  Mongols  had 
come.  Frederic  II  vainly  sought  to  rouse  Europe  against  the  invaders. 
They  countermarched  not  because  beaten,  but  recalled  by  the  death  of  the 
Great  Khan,  Octai.  Russia  was  a  Mongol  and  an  Asiatic  dependency 
till  about  1500,  when  Ivan  III  [1462-1505]  vigorously  began  its  consoli- 
dation as  an  independent  power. 

4  On  the  final  fall  of  Jerusalem  into  infidel  hands,  Weber,  Weltgesch., 

I.  753- 

5  ^4°5>28o,  or  about  $2,026,000,  according  to  Guizot,  who  follows  M. 
de  Wailly  in  supposing  the  500,000  livres  to  be  livres  of  Tours.  The 
Sultan,  Malek-Moaddam,  out  of  admiration  for  Louis,  reduced  the  sum  by 
20  per  cent. 

§  16     The  Crusades  in  the  West 

Irving,  Conquest  of  Granada.     Stanley  Lane-Poole,  Moors  in  Spain  [in  Story  of  the 
Nations  Ser.].     Duruy,  ch.  xxi. 

i  Against  the  heathen  Prussians,  by  the  knights  of 
the  Teutonic  Order.1     Successful,     ii  Against  the  Al- 


246  ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES 

bigenses,2  Christians  of  South  France,  by  Simon  de 
Montfort  and  his  men,  incited  by  Innocent  III,  to  en- 
force obedience  to  the  papacy.  Inquisition  :  thousands 
of  persons  barbarously  put  to  death,  civilization  crushed. 
iii  Against  the  Moors  in  Spain,  reconquering  this  land 
for  the  cross.  Out  of  the  Spanish  March,  and  out  of 
Asturias,  never  Mohammedan,  grew  in  course  of  time  a 
long  line  of  Christian  states :  Aragon,  Navarre,  Castile, 
Leon,  extending  across  the  entire  North.  The  victo- 
rious enlargement  southward,  of  these  Christian  king- 
doms, aided  by  the  dismemberment3  of  the  Caliphate 
of  Cordova,  is  full  of  interest  both  romantic  and  histori- 
cal. Periods :  1  Of  the  earliest  Christian  conquest,  to 
914.  James  of  Compostella  the  national  saint,  Chris- 
tians united,  Leon,  Burgos  and  other  towns  in  the 
Douro  Valley  won  by  Asturias,  henceforth  the  kingdom 
first  of  Oviedo,  then  of  Leon.  2  Of  reverse  and  Moor- 
ish reaction,  to  998.  Profiting  by  feuds  among  his  foes, 
Almanzor  the  Victorious  regains  for  the  crescent  all  the 
lost  territory  south  of  the  Ebro  and  Douro,  and  even 
takes  Barcelona  and  Compostella.  3  Of  consolidation 
and  new  advance  by  the  Christians,  to  1 1 18.  The  March 
and  Navarre  now  unite  with  Aragon,  Castile  with  Leon. 
Valencia,  Saragossa  and  Toledo  are  won,  Ommiad  unity 
is  forever  broken,  and  half  the  peninsula  already  Chris- 
tian. 4  Of  decisive  and  sweeping  Christian  victory,  to 
1238.  In  spite  of  enormous  Moorish  reinforcements 4 
from  Africa:  the  Almoravids,  1086,  the  Almohads,  1146, 
and  their  important  successes  at  Valencia  and  a  few 
other  places,  the  Christians  continued  to  advance.  Es- 
pecially did  Portugal  and  Aragon,  the  last  now  a  mighty 
kingdom,  stretching  beyond   the   Pyrenees.     From  its 


ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES  247 

total  defeat  at  Las  Navas  da  Tolosa,  1210,  the  Moorish 
power  never  recovers,  though  maintaining  itself  in  the 
little  kingdom  of  Granada  till  1492,  when  it  yields  finally 
and  entirely  to  Castile. 

1  On  this  Order,  see  §  18  and  n.  5.  The  knights  go  to  Prussia  [Preus- 
sen]  in  1226,  and  become  masters  there  by  means  of  hard  battles  between 
that  date  and  1283.  In  1509  John  Sigismund,  elector  of  Brandenburg, 
marries  Anne,  daughter  of  the  duke  of  Preussen,  and  in  1 61 8  the  two 
lands  are  united.  After  the  energetic  reign  of  Frederic  William,  the  Great 
Elector,  i64.o-'88,  his  son,  Elector  Frederic  III,  in  1701  announces  him- 
self as  King  Frederic  I  of  Prussia.  Preussen  was  not  however  even  then 
a  part  of  the  empire,  the  kings  remaining  in  relation  to  the  empire  electors 
of  Brandenburg  as  before.  See  Tuttle,  Prussia  to  Accession  of  Frederic 
the  Great,  293.    Connect  the  present  note  with  Ch.  V,  §  1 7,  n.  4,  Ch.  XI,  §  2. 

2  Read  Milman,  IX,  viii-x,  Michelet,  France,  bk.  iv,  ch.  vi,  vii.  It  was 
largely  to  counteract  the  Albigensian  heresy  that  the  Dominican  and  Fran- 
ciscan Preaching  Orders  were  instituted  under  Innocent  III.  Heresies 
rather  than  heresy.  Milman  discusses  (i)  the  simple  anti-sacerdotalists, 
repudiating  the  rites  and  authority  of  the  clergy  but  otherwise  orthodox, 
(ii)  the  Waldenses,  who  rejected  tradition  and  appealed  to  Scripture  alone 
as  fountain  of  doctrine,  and  (iii)  the  Manichseans  or  Paulicians,  who  were 
alleged  to  believe  in  an  eternal  principle  of  evil  in  the  manner  of  popular 
Zoroastrianism.  The  last  were  also  ascetic  in  practice.  '  The  papacy  has 
never  shaken  off  the  burden  of  its  complicity  in  the  remorseless  carnage 
perpetrated  by  the  crusaders  in  Languedoc,  in  the  crimes  and  cruelties  of 
Simon  de  Montfort.  Heresy  was  quenched  in  blood,  but  the  earth  sooner 
or  later  gives  out  the  terrible  cry  of  blood  for  vengeance  against  murderers 
and  oppressors.'    Milman. 

8  Cf.  §  9,  n.  3.  In  accord  with  this  is  the  fact  that  the  famous  Cid  [El 
Seid=  'the  lord,'  'the  big  man,'  called  in  his  time  'El  Campeador '  or 
'  the  Warrior  'J  who  belonged  to  the  third  of  the  periods  named  in  the 
text,  dying  in  1099,  fought  now  on  the  Christian  side,  now  on  the  Moorish. 
Beginning  with  1028  the  Ommiad  dominion  broke  up  into  the  little  states 
of  Huesca,  Saragossa,  Tortosa,  Toledo,  Badajoz,  Seville,  Granada,  Niebla, 
Algarbia,  and  Mallorca.  Asturias  became  Oviedo  in  792,  Leon  in  917. 
Burgos,  later  called  Castile,  was  first  a  county  of  Leon  but  became  inde- 
pendent in  923.  They  were  united  again  as  Castile  in  1230,  and  extended 
to  include  most  of  Navarre.    Navarre  on  the  other  hand  grew  out  of  th« 


248  ISLAM   AND    THE    CRUSADES 

March,  being  at  first  the  county  of  Pampeluna,  and  named  kingdom  of 
Navarre  about  850.  Aragon  began  as  another  county  of  the  March,  took 
in  several  other  counties,  then  fell  to  the  count  of  Barcelona.  Next,  as  a 
kingdom,  it  reached  far  into  France  northward  and  embraced  the  kingdom 
of  Valencia  southward.  Its  French  possessions  fell  away  in  1258,  but  it 
got  Sardinia  in  1297,  Naples  in  1442.  The  marriage  of  Ferdinand  and 
Isabella  coupled  Aragon  and  Castile  in  1479,  and  the  united  kingdom 
drove  the  Moors  from  Granada  in  1492  and  secured  the  Spanish  part  of 
Navarre  in  1502.  Cf.  Chaps.  V,  §  20,  n.  4,  VIII,  §  17,  and  n.  Portugal 
was  a  county  of  Castile,  its  count,  Alphonso,  assuming  independence  and 
the  royal  title  in  11 39. 

4  They  were  successive  invasions  of  conquerors  rather,  subjecting  the 
Spanish  Mohammedans  as  well  as  aiding  them. 

§17     Results   of  the   Crusades:1   Intellectual 
and  Social 

Milman,  VII,  vi.  Guizot,  Civilization  in  Europe,  viii.  Reuter,  Relig.  Aufkl'drung 
im  Mittelalter,  1  v.  Kugler,  423  sqq.  Weber,  Weltgesch.,  I,  755  sqq.  Choiseul- 
Daillecourt,  sec.  4.  Draper,  xvi-xviii.  Heeren,  321-348.  Lecky,  Rationalism, 
chaps,  v,  vi. 

While  failing  utterly  of  their  original  aim,2  the  cru- 
sades effected  tremendous  and  far-reaching  modifica- 
tions in  European  civilization.3  The  Albigensian  and 
the  Spanish  unified  respectively  France  and  Spain  and 
the  latter  founded  Portugal,  preparing  these  three  king- 
doms each  for  its  great  role  in  later  history.4  Still  more 
influential  by  far  were  the  eastern,  involving  view  of 
distant  lands,  contact  of  men  with  men,  of  peoples  with 
peoples,  the  entertainment  of  great  ideas,  and  the  effort, 
however  vain,  to  realize  them.  They  acquainted  Europe 
with  the  institutions,  conceptions,  literature,  art,  in  a 
word  with  the  higher  civilization  of  that  new  continent, 
the  Byzantine  and  Mohammedan  East.6  Marvellous  in- 
tellectual quickening  followed,  broader  notions  of  the 
world,  general  enrichment  of  culture.     Crusading  deeds 


ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES  249 

alone  furnished  much  new  matter  for  historical  litera- 
ture,6 infinite  new  stimulus  for  imaginative  creation  of 
all  kinds.7  Poetry,  music,  art  awoke  to  fresh  life-  The 
Gothic  had  now  its  birth.  The  preaching  orders 8  cher- 
ished letters  and  spread  zeal  therefor  both  directly  and 
by  evoking  literary  rivalry.  Geography  became  a  sci- 
ence. Knowledge  of  mathematics,  astronomy,  physics 
and  chemistry,  and  of  zoology  and  medicine  in  their 
various  branches  reached  a  perfection  hitherto  unknown 
in  Europe.  The  crusades  likewise  mark  an  era  in  lan- 
guage, since  they  created  need  of  better  means  for  in- 
ternational intercourse.9  Latin  was  cultivated  more 
industriously,  Semitic  study  began,  the  tongues  of  Eu- 
rope were  assimilated,  the  foundations  of  philology  laid. 
Charitable  organizations  became  more  numerous  and 
efficient,  man  as  man  was  prized  more  highly,  and  the 
opening  of  new  avenues  to  wealth  contributed  to  the 
culture  of  all  the  centuries  since. 

1  Choiseul-Daillecourt  errs  in  referring  too  much,  nearly  all  the  ad- 
vance of  the  1 2th  and  13th  centuries,  to  the  agency  of  the  crusades. 
Heeren  errs  equally  or  more  in  minimizing  this  agency.  To  distinguish 
with  any  great  precision  between  the  progress  really  mediated  by  the 
crusades  and  that  which  might  have  occurred  without  them,  is  obviously 
impossible. 

2  To  unite  the  eastern  and  western  churches  and  bring  the  Holy  Land 
under  Christian  government.  Mohammedanism  too  had  to  give  up  its 
out-lying  possession  [Spain],  as  Christianity  its  domain  in  Asia.  Eacli 
power  conquered  nearest  home,  lost  its  far  lands.  The  crescent  indeed 
invaded  Europe  again,  in  the  conquest  of  Constantinople,  securing  a  foot- 
hold from  which  it  has  not  yet  been  driven,  though  it  bids  fair  to  be  in  no 
long  time.     Cf.  §  7,  n.  8. 

3  Heeren's  essay  on  the  Political  Consequences  of  the  Reformation 
mentions  (i)  the  crusades,  (ii)  the  Reformation,  and  (iii)  the  French 
Revolution  as  the  great  generic  overturns  in  European  history  since  the 
dissolution  of  Rome. 


250  ISLAM    AND   THE    CRUSADES 

4  Spain  and  Portugal  as  discoverers  and  conquerors,  France  as  leader 
in  civilization. 

6  We  can  in  part  distinguish  (i)  influences  which  took  effect  in  the 
lives  and  thinking  of  the  crusaders  themselves,  and  (ii)  influences,  ideas, 
arts,  products,  etc.,  which  they  merely  conveyed  to  Europe.  A  very  great 
part  of  all  the  contribution  which  the  mediaeval  East  made  to  the  West 
[§  8,  cf.  Ch.  VIII,  §  3]  was  realized  through  the  crusades.  The  Latin 
empire  at  Constantinople  was  in  this  regard  of  great  service  to  Europe. 

6  The  dreary  chronicles  of  monks  now  yield  to  the  more  edifying  pages 
of  Villehardouin,  the  Sire  de  Joinville,  Jacques  de  Vitry  and  William  of 
Tyre.  No  other  period  of  equal  length  in  the  middle  age  presents  so 
many  historians  as  that  covered  by  the  crusades.   Choiseul-Daillecourt,  182. 

7  '  Romances  not  only  came  into  greater  vogue  but  also  changed  their 
subjects.  The  fabulous  deeds  in  arms  of  the  Knights  of  the  Round  Table, 
of  a  Roland,  of  a  Renaud  de  Montauban,  of  King  Arthur,  henceforth  fur- 
nished only  superannuated  and  unattractive  narrations.  The  languid 
amours  of  Tristram,  of  Lancelot,  of  Andre  of  France,  who  died  from  having 
loved  too  much  the  fair  one  whom  he  had  never  seen,  gave  way  to  more 
novel  recitals  upon  Godfrey  of  Bouillon,  the  caliphs,  the  sultans,  and  upon 
the  prodigies  wrought  by  Egyptian  and  Syrian  enchanters.'  Ibid.,  211. 
Cf.  Freytag,  Bilder,  I,  11,  Weber,  I,  765-94,  Raumer,  vol.  vi,  473-698. 

8  And  they  were  to  a  great  extent  products  of  the  crusades.  They 
aroused  rivalry  in  each  other,  in  the  older  orders,  and  in  the  learned  not 
in  orders  at  all.  The  University  of  Paris  stoutly  opposed  them,  sustained 
in  this  by  the  kings  of  France,  against  the  popes,  who  were  swift  to  dis- 
cover how  valuable  allies  they  had  in  these  mendicant  friars.  Michelet, 
bk.  iv,  ch.  ix,  Lacordaire,  L.  of  St.  Dominic. 

9  Michelet  speaks  of  Frederic  II  as  '  one  of  humanity's  voices  by  which 
Europe  took  up  again  its  fraternal  dialogue  with  Asia.'  European  civili- 
zation itself  also  now  received  a  uniformity  which  it  had  not  before 
possessed  since  the  days  of  the  old  Roman  empire.  Family  names, 
armorial  bearings  and  the  science  of  blazonry  sprung  up  during  and  in 
consequence  of  the  crusades.  See  Duruy,  316,  Choiseul-Daillecourt, 
106  sq.  These  movements  had  evil  results  as  well  as  good.  Besides  their 
infinite  cost  in  blood  and  treasure,  we  may  mention  in  particular  the  hatred 
toward  Moor  and  Jew  in  Spain,  a  main  factor  in  the  decline  of  that  land 
in  civilization  and  influence.  The  enlarged  power  of  the  church  [§  18] 
was  also  many  wise  a  bane. 


islam  and  the  crusades  25 1 

§  1 8     Ecclesiastical 

Milman,  VII,  vi.     Heeren,  137  sqq.     Ckotseul-Daillecourt,  sec.  a. 

The  eastern  crusades  exerted  a  decisive  influence  in  : 
1  Completing  the  separation  between  eastern  and  west- 
ern Christendom.1  2  Introducing  the  'inquisition  the- 
ory,' so  long  dominant,  of  defending  and  propagating 
truth.2  3  Enlarging  the  church's  wealth  by  property 
of  crusaders  bought  at  low  prices,  or  mortgaged  and 
not  redeemed,  or  alienated  to  the  church  by  commenda- 
tion.3 4  Increasing  the  power  of  the  popes,4  through 
the  authority  assumed  by  them  and  unchallenged  in 
this  excited  period,  to  '  bind  and  loose '  in  civil  things 
as  well  as  in  spiritual.  5  Erecting  the  great  Military 
Orders.6  Of  these,  besides  several  Spanish,  less  impor- 
tant, there  were  the  Hospitallers,  from  1048,  the  Tem- 
plars, from  1 1 18,  most  illustrious  of  all,  and  the  Teu- 
tonic, noted  for  its  agency  in  the  Prussian  crusade. 
Formed  to  help  defend  the  Holy  Land,  these  Orders 
subsequently  put  forth  their  chief  activity  in  Europe  as 
tireless  and  dauntless  propagandists  of  ecclesiasticism. 

1  Precisely  the  reverse  of  the  effect  intended.  See  §  17,  n.  2.  The 
formal  reunion  effected  at  the  Council  of  Florence  in  1438  amounted  to 
nothing.     See  Gibbon,  chaps,  lxvi,  lxvii. 

2  See  §  16,  n.  2.  A  recent  writer  cites  a  Spanish  paper  published  at 
Barcelona  even  since  1885,  which  expresses  a  longing  for  the  '  reestab- 
lishment  of  the  Holy  Tribunal  of  the  Inquisition,'  and  concludes :  •  What 
a  day  that  will  be  for  us  when  we  see  the  Masons,  Spiritualists,  Free- 
thinkers, and  anti-clericals  writhe  in  the  flames.' 

3  The  precise  process  described  at  Ch.  VI,  §  7.  See  note  143  in 
Choiseul-Daillecourt.  On  the  mortgaging,  Robertson,  Charles  V,  Int., 
Hume,  England,  ch.  xi. 

4  Hallam,  ch.  vii,  Milman,  vol.  iv,  460  sqq.  Cf.  Ch.  V,  §§  15-20. 
Eg.,  the  pope  was  allowed  now  as  he  would  not  have  been  but  for  the 


252  ISLAM    AND   THE    CRUSADES 

crusades,  to  absolve  criminals  on  condition  that  they  should  go  crusading. 
This  liberty  of  his  became  permanent. 

6  Duruy,  318  sqq.,  Ploetz's  Epitome,  217  sq.  All  the  orders  had  priests 
and  serving  brothers  as  well  as  knights.  The  Hospitallers  or  Knights  of 
the  Hospital  of  St.  John  in  Jerusalem  were  founded  by  Amalfi  merchants. 
They  wore  a  black  mantle  and  a  white  cross.  Their  headquarters  were 
transferred  to  Cyprus  in  1291,  to  Rhodes  in  1310,  to  Malta  in  1526.  The 
present  Knights  of  Malta,  with  little  but  a  nominal  existence,  have  their 
centre  at  Rome.  See  Whitworth,  H.  of  the  Knights  of  Malta,  2  v.  The 
Templars  [Ch.  VI,  §  19]  took  their  name  from  Solomon's  temple,  on 
whose  site  in  Jerusalem  the  first  seat  of  the  Order  was  supposed  to  be. 
Their  signs  were  a  white  mantle  and  a  red  cross.  They  too  removed  to 
Cyprus  in  1 29 1.  To  Philip  Fair's  work  in  their  destruction  succeeded  the 
official  dissolution  of  the  Order  by  his  instrument,  Pope  Clement  V,  in 
1312.  See  Milman,  XII,  i.  The  Teutonic  Order  [Milman,  vol.  vi,  535] 
began  as  a  German  hospital-brotherhood  at  Jerusalem  about  11 28,  its 
members  being  created  knights  by  Frederic  of  Swabia  before  Acre,  the 
first  seat  of  the  Order,  during  the  third  crusade.  Their  emblems  were  a 
white  mantle  and  a  black  cross.  In  1226  a  band  of  these  knights  went, 
under  their  Grand  Master,  Hermann  of  Salza,  to  Preussen  [§  16,  n.  1, 
Tuttle's  Prussia,  ch.  iv,  Weber,  I,  757],  then  held  by  the  heathen  Wends, 
which  they  reduced  to  their  sway  by  1283.  The  seat  of  their  Grand 
Master  became  Venice  in  1291,  Marienburg  in  1309,  Konigsberg  in  1457. 
Their  Prussian  lands  were  secularized  in  1525,  but  the  knights  who  re- 
mained catholic  kept  possession  of  the  Order's  lands  in  the  empire,  with 
seat  at  Mergentheim  in  Franconia.     The  Order  was  dissolved  in  1809. 

§  19    Political 

Hallam,  ch.  iii,  pt.  i.     Lecky,  Rationalism,  ch.  v.    Heeren,  164-342.    Heyd, 
Levantehandel. 

The  crusades  prolonged  by  well-nigh  four  centuries 
the  life  of  the  eastern  empire,  thereby  withholding  Italy 
and  perhaps  all  Europe  from  Mohammedan  conquest 
and  rule.  But  their  influence  was  more  strikingly  mani- 
fest at  home,  in  undermining  and  weakening  feudalism, 
to  the  advantage  of :  i  The  Communes,  to  which  the 
crusades  brought  new  consequence,  (i)  by  necessitating 


ISLAM   AND    THE   CRUSADES  253 

the  sale  to  them  of  new  privileges  by  needy  lords  wish- 
ing to  go  as  crusaders,  (2)  by  rendering  them,  lords 
being  absent,  practically  independent  even  beyond  this, 
and  (3)  by  making  them  rich.1  Their  citizens  competed 
with  the  church  in  purchasing  property  of  crusaders, 
made  enormous  profits  as  about  the  sole  purveyors  for 
the  crusades.  The  ascendancy  of  the  great  Italian 
emporiums,  Venice,  Genoa,  Pisa,  Amalfi,  now  begins. 
Commerce  and  business  are  henceforth  reputable :  Philip 
Augustus  raises  burghers  to  the  nobility.  A  civic  re- 
placed the  chivalric  spirit.  The  new  legal  study  and 
intellectual  life  had  seat  in  towns,  which  thus  became 
the  strongholds  of  the  third  estate.2  ii  Monarchy,  par- 
ticularly in  France.  The  strengthening  of  the  third 
estate  had  the  like  effect  on  monarchy.  But  besides 
and  directly,  the  '  truce  of  God ' 3  and  the  entire  relig- 
ious spirit  of  the  crusades  aided  the  king  in  abolishing 
private  wars.  Roman  law  greatly  widened  its  sphere 
by  the  suspension  of  feudal  courts.  A  more  scientific 
and  efficient  military  system  came  in,  that  of  standing 
armies,4  in  which  command  fell  to  the  king,  while  the 
changed  proportions  of  infantry  and  cavalry  called  less 
for  knights,  more  for  that  class  of  soldiers  friendly  to 
the  king.  Many  great  feudal  families  were  weakened 
or  annihilated.  Innumerable  benefices  escheated  to 
the  king  or  passed  by  purchase  and  royal  investiture  to 
rich  representatives  of  the  third  estate,  wholly  anti- 
feudal  in  sentiment. 

1  Blanqui,  H.  of  Pol.  Economy,  ch.  xiv,  Choiseul-Daillecourt,  sec.  2,  3. 
See  the  ordinance  of  Humbert  II,  dauphin  of  Viennois  [Robertson, 
Charles  V,  Int.],  promising  new  indemnities  to  the  cities  and  boroughs  on 
his  domains  in  return  for  monies  paid  him  toward  his  crusade. 


254  ISLAM    AND    THE    CRUSADES 

2  On  all  this,  cf.  Ch.  VI,  §§  16-20. 

8  The  church's  solemn  inhibition  of  hostilities  in  a  given  locality  from 
Wednesday  to  Sunday  evening  each  week,  also  during  Advent  and  Lent  and 
on  certain  festival  days.  It  was  introduced  after  the  great  famine  of  1028- 
'30,  by  the  bishops  of  Aquitaine,  as  a  universal  peace,  but  could  not  be 
maintained  as  such.  Du  Cange,  s.  v.  '  Treuga.'  It  was  unknown  in  Ger- 
many and  but  locally  observed  in  France,  Spain  [from  1045]  and  Eng- 
land [from  1080]  till  the  crusades,  when,  at  the  Council  of  Clermont, 
Urban  II  made  it  obligatory  generally.  There  were  various  other  sorts  of 
truces,  differing  according  to  the  manner  in  which  they  were  sworn  and 
the  obligations  they  imposed.  Choiseul-Daillecourt,  n.  98.  The  truce  of 
God  aided  the  general  peace  in  the  same  way  as  Philip  Augustus's  qua- 
rantaine-le-roy  [Ch.  VI,  §  17]. 

4  Hallam,  in  pt.  ii  of  ch.  ii.  Teutonic  military  history  has  had  three 
periods,  those  of  (i)  the  old  Heerbann,  every  landholder  liable  to  service 
in  defence  of  his  country,  (ii)  the  feudal  militia,  each  vassal,  if  summoned, 
being  bound  to  serve  his  suzerain  in  arms  40  days  each  year  at  his  own 
cost,  and  no  more  except  by  special  contract  for  special  pay,  and  (iii) 
hired  troops  and  standing  armies.    Cf.  Robertson,  Charles  V,  Int.,  ii. 

§  20    The  Same 

Choiseul-Daillecourt,  sec.  1.    Heeren,  as  at  last  §.    Roscher,  Pol.  Economy,  I,  *2o  sqq 

In  these  and  other  ways  the  crusades  greatly  dis- 
seminated and  intensified  the  spirit  of  freedom.  The 
entire  development  of  towns  and  of  the  third  estate  was 
of  course  in  this  direction.  Common  hardships  created 
among  crusaders  of  different  ranks  a  fraternal  feeling. 
Even  serfs  on  taking  the  cross  became  free,1  the  breth- 
ren of  their  fellow-campaigners.  This  contributed  to 
higher  esteem  for  serfs  as  a  class,  resulting  in  extensive 
emancipation  at  home.2  Louis  VII,  1137-80,  ascribes 
to  all  men  a  common  origin  and  also  a  '  certain  natural 
liberty,  only  to  be  forfeited  through  crime.'  In  1256, 
Bologna  gave  liberty  to  all  within  her  walls  not  already 
possessing  it,  declaring  that  '  in  a  free  city  none  but  the 


ISLAM   AND   THE   CRUSADES  255 

free  should  dwell.'  Florence  followed  this  example  in 
1288,  as,  at  about  the  same  time,  did  Philip  of  Valois, 
'in  the  name  of  equality  and  natural  liberty.'  And 
Louis  X  in  13 15,  'since,  according  to  the  law  of  nature 
all  ought  to  be  born  free,'  considering  that  his  kingdom 
was  called  the  kingdom  of  the  Franks  (free),  and  wish- 
ing the  reality  to  accord  with  the  name,  ordained  that 
'  to  all  those  who,  by  origin  or  antiquity,  or  newly,  by 
marriage  or  by  residence  in  places  of  servile  condition, 
had  fallen  or  might  fall  into  bond  of  servitude,  franchise 
be  given.'  3 

1  Justinian's  Novella  8l  ordained  the  manumission  of  all  slaves  who, 
masters  permitting,  had  well  performed  military  service.  No  such  law,  so 
far  as  known,  was  made  by  popes  in  reference  to  serf-crusaders,  their 
permission  to  enlist  apparently  resting  on  general  consent.  To  serfs  on 
church  lands,  as  church  property  could  be  alienated  in  no  ordinary  man- 
ner, the  crusades  opened  practically  the  sole  door  to  liberty. 

2  Many  communes  had  charters  which  guaranteed  the  franchise  of 
fugitive  serfs  resident  therein  unless  reclaimed  within  a  certain  time.  Hosts 
of  serfs  became  free  thus  who  had  left  their  masters  on  pretence  of  cru- 
sading. Vagabonds  were  no  longer  as  heretofore  presupposed  to  be  serfs 
and  held  to  prove  the  contrary. 

8  The  same  wave  of  right  sentiment  swept  over  England,  where  the 
machinery  of  representation,  long  known  in  local  work,  now  secured  ap- 
plication in  national  affairs.  In  his  writ  to  the  prelates  for  the  first  com- 
plete English  parliament,  1295,  Edward  I  says:  'As  the  most  righteous 
law,  established  by  the  provident  circumspection  of  the  sacred  princes, 
exhorts  and  ordains  that  that  which  touches  all  should  be  approved  by  all, 
it  is  very  evident  that  common  dangers  must  be  met  by  measures  concocted 
in  common.'  Stubbs,  vol.  ii,  12S.  The  sentence  italicized  is  from  Jus- 
tinian's Code,  title  56,  law  5,  —  a  proverb  often  met  with  in  mediaeval 
writers. 


SELECT   BIBLIOGRAPHY   TO   CHAPTER  VIII 

Renaissance  :  Symonds,  Ren.  in  Italy,**  7  v.  [including  the  2  v.  on 
the  Catholic  Reaction.  These  7  v.  best  lit.  in  Eng.  on  the  Ren.] ;  Int.  to 
Study  of  Dante;  'Renaissance'  in  Encyc.  Brit,  [good  lit.].  Burckhardt, 
Civilization  of  the  Period  of  the  Ren.  in  It.,**  2  v.  Voigt,  1  Jahrh.  d. 
Humanismus ;  **  Wiederbelebung  d.  hi.  Alterthums**  2  v.  Grimm, 
Michael  Angelo,**  2  v.  Crowe,  Tizian,  2  v.  Northcote,  do.,  2  v. 
Crowe  and  Cavalcaselle,  Raphael,**  2  v.  [cf.  their  Histories  of  Painting, 
in  No.  It.,  2  v.,  in  It.,  3  v.].  Geiger  [in  Oncken],  Ren.  u.  Humanis- 
mus.** Sismondi,  Hist,  de  la  Ren.  en  It.,  2  v.;  Lit.  of  the  So.  of  Eu- 
rope, 2  v.  Draper,  Int'l  Development  of  Europe.  Milman,  L.  C,  vols, 
vii  and  viii.  Miintz,  Precurseurs  de  la  Ren. ;  *  Raphael,  vie,  ceuvre  el 
temps ;  *  Ren.  en  It.  et  en  Fr.  a  lepoaue  de  Charles  VIII*  Hallam,  Lit. 
n{  Europe,  4  v.  Froude  [Short  Studies,  I],  'T.  of  Erasmus  and  Luther.' 
Reuter,  Gesch.  d.  Aufkl'drung  im  Mittelalter.**  Vico,  Italia  e  V  Europa 
dopo  il  secolo  xv  [Wks.,  I,  ed.  Ferrari].  Michelet,  Hist,  de  France,  vol. 
vii.  Ronard,  Ren.  en  Italie.  Schulze,  Philos.  d.  Ren.,  2  v.  Ranke, 
Sammtl.  Werke,  vols,  xxxiii,  xxxiv,  xl.  Ziller,  Italie  et  la  Ren.  Tira- 
boschi,  letteratura  Italiana,  vols,  vii-x.  Pater,  Renaissance.  Hase, 
Kirchengesch.  [10th  ed.].  [Geo.  Eliot's  Romola,  Bulwer's  Rienzi, 
Stein's  Count  Erbach,  Geo.  Taylor's  Clytia,  and  Ch.  Reade's  Cloister 
and  Hearth,  are  good  novels  to  illustrate  this  Ch.  Samson,  Low  & 
Co.  publish  brief  biogg.  of  the  great  artists.]  Reformation:  Fisher, 
Reformation*  [with  lit.].  Martin,  Hist,  de  France,  vol.  x.  Michelet, 
do.,  vol.  viii;  Abrege  on  Temps  modernes.  Robertson,  Charles  V,** 
3  v,  or  2.  Henne,  Charles- Quint,  10  v.  [in  5].  Seebohm,  Prot.  Revo- 
lution [Ep.  of  H.  Ser.].  Hausser,  Period  of  the  Reformation,*  2  v.  or  I. 
Creighton,  Papacy  dg.  Reformation*  [2  v.  out,  iii  and  iv.  in  pr.].  Ranke, 
Popes,  3  v.;  Ref.  in  Germany,**  3  v.;  Franzosische  Gesch.  in  XI' I  it. 
XVII  Jahrh.,  5  v.;  Hist,  of  the  Lat.  and  Teutonic  Na.,  1494-1514 
[Bohn].  Kbstlin,  L.  of  Luther.*  Michelet,  do.  [Bohn].  Kuhn, 
Luther,  sa  vie  et  son  ceuvre,**  3  v.  Griin,  Kulturgesch.  d.  XVI  Jahrh. 
Schaff,  Ch.  History,  vol.  vi.  Gieseler,  do.,  vol.  iv.  Guizot,  Civ.  in  Eur., 
xii.  Villers,  Ess.  on  the  Sp.  and  Inf.  of  the  Ref.  Janssen,  Gesch.  d. 
deutschen  Volkes,**  vols,  ii,  iii.  Freitag,  Bilder,  II.  [The  standard  ed. 
of  Luther's  Wks.  is  Knaacke's,  under  government  supervision.  Nie» 
meyer  of  Halle  pub.  cheap  edd.  of  the  main  original  doc.  of  XVI  and 
XVII  cent.  See  also  Schilling's  excellent  Quellenbuch.  For.  lit.  on 
Luther,  Bullet,  of  Mercantile  Lib.,  Philad.,  Oct.  1,  1883]. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION 


§  i     Genius  of  the  Renaissance 

Symonds,  Age  of  Despots,  i,  also  last  ch.     Voigt,  Wiederbelebung,  Int. 

During  the  fifteenth  century  a  change  as  subtle  and 
indefinable  as  it  was  significant  came  over  the  spirit  of 
European  society.  Without  sharp  break  with  the  past, 
involving  no  strictly  new  creation,1  no  sudden  or  un- 
heralded revolution  of  ideas,  gradually  rose  an  altered 
mode  of  viewing  man,  the  world,  life,  far  less  theologi- 
cal than  the  old,  less  respectful  to  tradition,  more  con- 
fident in  man's  powers  and  future,  in  fine,  laic  and 
human.2  Renewed  study  of  classical  antiquity  was  sign 
and  instrument  rather  than  essence  of  the  new  move- 
ment. If  men  looked  back,  it  was  mostly  to  clear  their 
vision  to  look  and  walk  forward.  The  new  thinking,  if 
marked  by  temporary  unbelief,  and  more  given  than  the 
old  to  human  and  secular  things,  was  not  essentially 
irreligious,  if  less  scholastic,  not  less  profound.  Vaster 
conceptions  of  the  field  of  truth  were  born.3  It  was  felt 
that  no  problem  had  been  absolutely  settled,  and  that 
the  human  faculties,  fettered  or  discouraged  or  else  ap- 
plied to  inane  inquiries,  had  as  yet  scarcely  given  a  hint 
of  the  productive  activity  possible  to  them.4  Hence, 
fresh,  courageous,  successful  effort  to  see  what  man 
might  be,  do,  know.     Modern  history,  in  the  narrower 


258  RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION 

sense,  now  begins.  '  The  history  of  the  Renaissance,' 
says  Symonds,  '  is  the  history  of  the  attainment  of  self- 
conscious  freedom  by  the  human  spirit,  manifested  in 
the  European  races.' 

1  Even  in  art,  in  painting  itself,  no  absolute  beginning  was  made. 
Voigt,  Wiederbelebung,  I,  4,  379.  The  Renaissance  grew  necessarily  out 
of  existing  conditions. 

2  Bezold,  Hist.  Zeitschr.,  vol.  xlix,  194.  A  similar  change  followed  the 
advent  of  Grecian  culture  in  Asia  [with  Alexander]  and  at  Rome  [Voigt, 
I,  4].  Michelet's  neat  dictum,  adopted  by  Symonds  [Despots,  16]  and 
Burckhardt,  makes  the  Renaissance  '  the  discovery  of  the  world  and  of 
man.'  We  add :  '  and  of  their  close  relationship.'  Theology  had  exalted 
man,  but  as  candidate  for  another  world.  Humanism,  in  the  vein  of  the 
cultivated  Greeks  and  Romans,  was  geo-centric,  glorying  in  the  earthly- 
human.  '  During  the  middle  ages,'  says  Symonds,  '  man  had  lived  envel- 
oped in  a  cowl.  He  had  not  seen  the  beauty  of  the  world,  or  had  seen  it 
only  to  cross  himself  and  turn  aside  and  tell  his  beads  and  pray.  Like 
St.  Bernard,  travelling  along  the  shores  of  the  Lake  Leman,  and  noticing 
neither  the  azure  of  the  waters  nor  the  luxuriance  of  the  vines  nor  the 
radiance  of  the  mountains  with  their  robe  of  sun  and  snow,  but  bending  a 
thought-burdened  face  over  the  neck  of  his  mule,  even  like  this  monk, 
humanity  had  passed,  a  careful  pilgrim,  intent  on  the  terrors  of  sin,  death 
and  judgment,  along  the  highways  of  the  world,  and  had  not  known  that 
they  were  sightworthy  or  that  life  is  a  blessing.  Beauty  is  a  snare,  pleas- 
ure a  sin,  the  world  a  fleeting  show,  man  fallen  and  lost,  death  the  only 
certainty,  hell  everlasting,  heaven  hard  to  win,  —  these  were  the  fixed  ideas 
of  the  ascetic,  mediaeval  church.  The  Renaissance  shattered  them  by 
rending  the  thick  veil  which  they  had  drawn  between  the  mind  of  man 
and  the  outer  world,  and  flashing  the  light  of  reality  upon  the  darkened 
places  of  his  own  nature.' 

8  See  §  13.  St.  Bernard,  arguing  against  Abelard  and  his  nominalism, 
evidently  thought  it  the  quintessence  of  fatuity  to  pretend  to  advance  a 
new  idea.  '  Who  are  you  to  make  an  improvement  in  thought  ?  Tell  us, 
pray,  what  that  truth  is  which  has  made  its  epiphany  to  you  but  to  no  one 
before.  For  my  part  I  hearken  to  the  prophets,  the  apostles  and  the 
gospel,  and  were  an  angel  to  come  from  heaven  to  teach  us  the  contrary, 
anathema  upon  him ! '  Identifying,  as  so  many  another  bigot  has  done, 
the  truth  with  his  own  apprehension  thereof. 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  259 

4  How  Petrarch,  e.g.,  felt  toward  scholasticism,  Voigt,  I,  71.  Michelet, 
Int.  to  vol.  vii,  passim,  expresses  a  still  worse  judgment.  He  calls  1200 
the  saddest  year  in  history.  See,  esp.,  notes  to  his  §§  iii  and  iv.  The 
13th  century  was  the  time  when  the  Albigenses  and  the  Waldenses  were 
annihilated  for  their  beliefs,  the  Inquisition  set  up  and  individuality  crushed 
out.  After  Roger  Bacon  zeal  in  light-seeking  lessened  greatly.  Michelet 
does  not  believe  that  writers  have  sufficiently  noted  this  reaction.  Hettner, 
e.g.,  takes  1300  as  the  terminus  a  quo  of  the  Renaissance. 

§  2     Its  Antecedents 

Hallam,  Lit.,  pt.  i,  ch.  i.    Burckhardt,  III,  i.    Michelet,  Int.    Reuter,  Relig.  Auf- 
klarung  int  Mittelalter.     Voigt,  Int. 

Memory  and  love  of  classical  culture,  at  no  time  ut- 
terly so,  were  yet  during  the  full  middle  age,  practically 
dead.  Boethius  was  the  last  man  whom  they  powerfully 
affected.1  The  church  viewed  ancient  art  and  letters  as 
hopelessly  bound  up  with  heathenism.  Old  manuscripts 
were  lost  or  forgotten,  the  noblest  works  of  antique  art 
suffered  to  perish  or  be  lost  in  rubbish.2  Heathen  tem- 
ples were  defaced  or  pulled  down  : 3  the  Roman  forum, 
its  precious  buildings  levelled  beneath  feet  of  earth, 
became  a  cow-pasture.  Latin  grew  corrupt,  at  last 
scarcely  reminding  of  its  origin.  At  the  same  time 
with  this,  slavish  reverence  for  ecclesiastical  authority 
was  working  to  prevent  all  originality,  aggression,  cour- 
age in  thinking.4  The  light  kindled  by  Karl  the  Great 
and  Alcuin  shone  neither  far  nor  long.5  The  fine  intel- 
lectual life  of  the  Hohenstaufen  period,  brilliant  rather 
than  strong,  was  likewise  a  temporary  phenomenon.6 
Study  of  Roman  law,  momentous  in  its  way,  could  not 
revive  the  civilization  whence  that  law  sprung.  Scho- 
lasticism in  the  thirteenth  century,  with  its  worship  and 
imperfect 7  understanding  of  Aristotle,  had  a  still  less 


20O  RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION 

favorable  tendency.  If  it  created  mental  strength,  dis* 
cipline  and  restlessness  that  were  seeds  of  rich  promise, 
it  buried  these  seeds  deep.  With  all  its  profound  and 
true  thoughts,  dogmatism,  formalism,  narrowness,8  ab- 
straction were  its  most  obtrusive  and  influential  char- 
acteristics. 

1  Not  excepting  Alcuin  [Ch.  V,  §  5]  or  even  Cassiodorus,  Boethius's 
contemporary.  Cassiodorus,  about  480-575,  and  Boethius,  about  470-524, 
were  influential  in  every  way,  but  especially  in  the  history  of  education, 
because  of  their  agency  in  preserving  the  continuity  of  classical  pedagogics 
into  that  of  the  middle  age.  Boethius  prepared,  mainly  translating  them 
from  the  Greek,  treatises  on  Geometry  according  to  Euclid,  Music  ace. 
to  the  Pythagoreans,  Arithmetic  ace.  to  Nicomachus,  Mechanics  ace.  to 
Archimedes,  Astronomy  ace.  to  Ptolemy,  Grammar  and  Rhetoric  and 
Dialectics  ace.  to  Aristotle.  He  called  these  the  seven  liberal  arts.  As 
such  they  were  made  the  subject  of  Cassiodorus's  able  work,  de  septem  dis- 
ciplinis,  much  and  usefully  read  in  the  middle  ages.  Weber,  Weltgesch., 
516  sq. 

2  The  middle  age  had  next  to  no  love  of  literature  for  its  own  sake. 
Too  much  credit  has  been  given  the  monks  for  preserving  the  classics. 
Benvenuto  d'  Imola  went  once  to  Monte  Casino  and  found  there  the 
rarest  manuscripts  lying  helter-skelter  in  a  chamber  without  lock  or  key 
or  even  doors.  Of  many  the  monks  had  cut  out  the  finest  parchment  to 
make  breviaries  and  psalters  for  sale.  If  this  here,  what  not  at  Fulda, 
Cluny  or  St.  Gall?  A  complete  codex  of  Quinctilian  was  at  St.  Gall  liter- 
ally unearthed  from  the  dirt,  a  fuller  Cicero  at  Lodi.  When  in  181 6 
Niebuhr  discovered  in  the  Verona  Cathedral  library  the  precious  copy  of 
Caius's  Institutes,  the  old  text  was  everywhere  bedimmed  and  in  places 
made  irrecoverable  forever  by  being  written  over  with  epistles  of  St.  Jerome. 
Just  how  or  how  far  classical  letters  and  interest  perished  in  the  early 
middle  age  no  one  knows.  There  are  Mss.  of  some  of  the  great  Latin 
classics  dating  from  every  century  in  what  are  called  the  dark  ages,  and 
there  were  always  a  few  who  loved  to  read  them.  Most,  however,  were 
more  in  Jerome's  state  of  mind,  who  dreamed  that  for  reading  Cicero  he 
was  cited  to  Christ's  bar  and  scourged  till  he  vowed  never  to  con  secular 
books  again.  '  Mentiris]  said  Christ  on  Jerome's  calling  himself  a  Chris- 
tian, ' Ciceronianus  es,  non  Christianus,  ubi  enim  thesaurus  tuus  ibi  et  cor 
tuum.' 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  26l 

8  Passing  from  view  by  sheer  carelessness,  not  unavoidably  as  in  Pom- 
peii. Recovery  is  not  complete  even  now.  See  Century  Magazine,  Feb., 
1887  The  Pantheon  was  nearly  spoiled  by  conversion  into  a  church. 
Pope  Urban  VIII  pulled  off  the  under  covering  of  its  portico,  the  most 
remarkable  metallic  work  of  antiquity,  for  cannon  metal.  There  were 
450,000  lbs.  of  bronze. 

*  The  inquisitors  deemed  it  a  sufficient  condemnation  of  Galileo  that 
his  views  contradicted  Aquinas  and  Aristotle  [Ch.  Ill,  §  4,  n.  4].  Not 
'  herzitstellen '  anything,  says  Schulze  neatly,  did  the  mediaeval  doctors 
regard  their  task,  but  only  '  darzustellen.' 

6  Einhard,  though  bright  [Ch.  V,  §  5],  was  but  an  imitator  —  of  Sue- 
tonius, as  were  Widukind  and  Adam  of  Bremen  of  Sallust.  The  classical 
literature  known  to  these  and  later  medisevals  did  not  inspire  them.  They 
did  not  regret  antiquity,  as  Petrarch  did,  for  example. 

6  See  the  references  at  Ch.  VII,  §  17,  n.  7.  Bezold  declares  that 
under  the  Hohenstaufen  German  culture  was  in  advance  of  Italian.  Miintz 
places  Frederic  II  [Ch.  V,  §  19]  at  the  head  of  the  precursors  of  the 
Renaissance.     Michelet  assigns  this  place  to  Joachim  of  Flora  [§  15]. 

7  Mediaeval  knowledge  of  Aristotle  was  long  nearly  all  at  second,  third 
or  fourth  hand.  The  Arabians  of  Spain,  Europe's  earliest  schoolmasters 
in  his  philosophy  [Ueberweg,  H.  of  Philos.,  §  96],  used  Arabic  transla- 
tions of  Syriac  translations.  Even  Averroes  had  only  a  Hebrew  transla- 
tion of  a  commentary  made  on  the  basis  of  an  Arabic  translation  of  a 
Syriac  translation  of  the  Greek  text.  Renan,  Averroes  et  Faverroisme, 
39.     Cf.  §  14,  4,  and  note. 

8  Aquinas,  prince  of  the  schoolmen,  believed  in  two  kinds  of  weather, 
natural,  made  by  God,  and  artificial,  made  by  wicked  men.  Riehl.  Cf. 
Weber,  I,  730,  Duruy,  Moyen  Age,  359  sqq.,  Cousin,  Ess.  on  the  Phiioso- 
phie  scholastique.  It  was  very  crafty,  thinks  Michelet,  for  the  church  to 
give  men  liberty  of  formal  thought.  To  have  forbidden  all  thinking 
would  have  dangerously  stimulated  thinking.     Cf.  §  11,  n.  3. 

§  3     Its  Dawn 

Sismondi,  Lit.  of  So.  Europe,  chaps,  ii,  iii.  Weber,  Weltgesch.,  I,  89  sqq.  Voigt, 
Wiederbelebung,  I,  89  sqq.  Renan,  Averroes  et  Paverro'isnte.  Choiseul-Daille- 
court,  Inf.  des  Croisades,  sec.  4.     Schulze,  Philos.  d.  Renaissance,  I. 

The  intellectual  darkness  of  Europe  in  the  ninth  and 
tenth  centuries  first  broke  in  Arabian  Spain,  whither, 


262  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

with  Mohammedan  conquest,  had  pressed,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  old  culture  of  the  east  Mediterranean  lands, 
taken  up  and  for  a  time  seduously  fostered  by  Islam.1 
Through  students  from  the  North  thronging  their 
schools,  the  Arabians,  both  as  free  investigators  and  as 
editors  and  expounders  of  the  classics,  became  the 
teachers  of  Europe.2  A  most  happy  outcome  of  the 
crusades  was  the  quickened  and  enlarged  intercourse  of 
western  with  Greek  and  Arabian  savans.  The  Greek 
language  now  began  to  be  known,3  Aristotle  learned  at 
first  hand.  Schools  and  studies  flourished  everywhere, 
national  literatures  had  birth.  Bologna  and  Oxford  had 
each  its  group  of  students  by  1150.  The  Universities 
of  Paris  and  Salamanca  date  from  1 200,  the  former  often 
numbering  15,000  pupils,  sometimes  more.  Many  other 
universities  were  active  before  1300.4  Intelligence  grew 
more  independent  as  well  as  broader :  the  clergy  lost 
their  monopoly  of  learning.  Abelard,  1 097-1 142,  Al- 
bertus  Magnus,  1 193-1280,  and  Roger  Bacon,  1214-94, 
were  worthy  prophets5  of  the  Renaissance,  unless  in- 
deed we  date  the  Renaissance  itself  from  their  days. 
The  first  dared  to  break  with  the  traditional,  dogmatic 
realism  and  to  assert  the  rights  of  reason.  The  others 
preached  and  introduced  inductive,  aposteriori  scientific 
procedure  in  a  spirit  worthy  of  Stuart  Mill.  Among 
his  three  sources  of  knowledge,  above  authority  and 
reasoning,  Roger  Bacon  places  experience,  as  the  term 
of  all  speculation  and  as  the  queen  of  the  sciences, 
'alone  able  to  certify  and  crown  their  results.' 

1  Ch.  VII,  §§  8,  17.  Renan  is  of  opinion  that  the  deepest  spirit  of 
Islam  was  after  all  not  friendly  to  Aristotle  or  to  philosophy  proper  by 
whomsoever  taught.     Christian  teachers  too  dreaded  the  Stagirite  at  first. 


RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION  263 

Dinanto's  work,  1209,  the  earliest  visibly  to  employ  A.'s  principles  in  doc- 
trinal construction,  was  condemned,  as  were  the  physical  and  metaphysical 
writings  of  the  philosopher  himself.  In  1 231  the  Univ.  of  Paris  forbids 
reading  on  these  subjects  till  further  orders,  in  1251  it  permits  a  limited 
number  of  lectures  on  them,  a  hundred  years  later  it  proclaims  Aristotle 
Christ's  forerunner  in  natural  things  as  John  Baptist  in  spiritual.  In  thus 
dispelling  the  fear  of  Aristotle  and  of  philosophy  Aquinas  was  the  most 
influential.  His  summa  or  text-book,  instead  of  being  a  summa  theologica 
as  such  had  usually  been  named,  was  a  summa  philosophica  de  veritate 
catholica.   Schulze. 

2  So  in  De  Monorchia  Dante  refers  familiarly  as  well  as  favorably  to 
Averroes  [=Ibn  Raschid:  about  H20-'98,  i.e.,  nearly  covering  the  12th 
century]. 

8  For  centuries  Greek  was  almost  unknown  in  the  West.  In  Sicily  and 
Calabria,  e.g.,  in  the  cloisters  of  St.  Basil  at  Rossano,  hellenic  studies 
were  never  laid  aside,  at  least  till  late  in  the  13th  century.  Paulus  Diaco- 
nus  at  Karl  Great's  court,  Scotus  Erigena  [d.  880]  and  Roger  Bacon  could 
read  Greek,  but  neither  Gerbert,  Abelard,  John  of  Salisbury  [mo-'8o], 
the  most  learned  man  of  his  time,  nor  Aquinas,  the  doctor  angelicus. 
After  Karl  Great  Greek  apparently  ceased  to  be  in  the  West  a  regular 
branch  of  learning,  and  was  known  only  to  a  few  clergymen  and  gram- 
marians, more  in  Ireland  than  elsewhere.  Nor  is  any  writer  till  Richard 
de  Bury,  about  1350,  known  to  have  expressed  regret  at  ignorance  of  this 
tongue.  Till  a  late  period  but  two  of  Aristotle's  treatises  were  known  to 
northern  scholars  [Ch.  VI,  §  8].  Abelard  had  no  others,  though  Gilbertus 
Porretanus  [d.  1154]  knew  both  the  Analytics,  and  John  of  Salisbury  the 
whole  Organon.  The  Arabians  gave  to  Europe  [1250-1300]  A.'s  physical 
and  metaphysical  books,  all  in  their  wretched,  circuitous  translations  [§  2, 
n.  7].  First  not  far  from  1220  Robert  Grostete,  1 175-1255,  bp.  of  Lin- 
coln, caused  a  translation  of  A.  to  be  made  directly  from  the  Greek.  Plato, 
till  the  very  morning  of  the  Renaissance,  was  less  known  still,  represented 
only  by  the  Timaeus  in  an  incomplete  translation,  and  ignored  by  eccle- 
siastical writers.  As  to  Homer,  Dante  cites  him,  but  like  Homer's  seven 
friends  in  Italy  whom  Petrarch  counted  up,  must  have  read  him  in  trans- 
lation alone.  Dante  praises  Hebrew  likewise,  of  course  without  under- 
standing it.     See  on  all  this,  Hallam,  Lit,  pt.  i,  ch.  ii. 

4  For  the  universities  of  Italy,  Tiraboschi,  V,  iii.  The  most  ancient 
and  illustrious  besides  that  of  Paris  were  Montpellier  and  Orleans  in 
France,  Oxford  and  Cambridge  in  England,  Bologna  [often  with  10,000 
students],  Naples,  Padua  and  Rome  in  Italy,  Salamanca  in  Spain,  and 


264  RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION 

Colmbra  in  Portugal,  all  founded  before  1300.  The  oldest  in  the  German 
empire  [Janssen,  vol.  i]  was  Prague,  1348,  then  Heidelberg  in  1386, 
Cologne  1388  and  Erfurt  1392  [both  now  extinct],  Wttrzburg  1403,  Leip- 
zig 1409,  Rostock  1419,  Louvain  1436,  Greifswald  1454,  Freiburg  in 
Breisgau  1456,  Basel  1460,  Ingolstadt  [now  Munich]  1472,  Tubingen 
1477,  Wittenberg  [now  Halle]  1 502,  Frankfort  on  the  Oder  [now  Breslau], 
1506,  Marburg  1527,  Strassburg  1538. 

6  On  these  men,  see  Whewell,  H.  of  Ind.  Sciences,  bk.  xii,  ch.  vii, 
Milman,  vol.  viii,  257  sqq.,  Michelet,  Int.,  Schulze,  I,  Weber,  I,  806  sqq. 
Porphyry's  Isagoge  to  Aristotle's  Categories  [called  the  quinque  voces'],  the 
chief  philosophical  text-book  of  the  middle  age,  had  already  set  forth  the 
conflict  between  Plato  and  Aristotle  upon  the  nature  of  universals  or  gen- 
eral ideas.  Both  regarded  universals  as  realia  [Realism],  only  to  Plato 
they  were  ante  rem,  transcendent,  separable  from  things,  while  Aristotle 
viewed  them  as  only  in  re,  the  types  and  immanent  forces  of  things. 
Abelard  sided  with  Aristotle  but  stopped  short  of  the  extreme  Nominalism 
of  Roscellinus.  See  Ueberweg,  H.  of  Philos.,  §§  90-94.  Duns  Scotus  and 
Wm.  of  Occham  however  recurred  to  the  12th  century  Nominalists,  Roscel- 
linus, Eric  of  Auxerre  and  Raimbert  of  Lille,  making  universals  to  be  not 
realia  either  ante  rem  or  in  re,  but  only  nomina,  and  hence  of  course 
post  rem. 

§  4    Dante,  Petrarch,  Boccaccio  1 

Symonds,  Revival  of  Learning,  i,  ii.  Gibbon,  lxx.  Milman,  vol.  viii,  338  sqq.  Tira- 
boschi,  vol.  vi,  ch.  ii.  Geiger,  I,  i-iii.  Hettner, '  Petrarch  u.  Boccaccio'  Deutsche 
Rundschau,  vol.  ii,  1875.  Sismondi,  Lit.  of  So.  Europe,  chaps,  ix,  x,  xi.  Burck- 
hardt,  III,  ii,  iv,  IV,  iv.     Voigt,  bk.  i. 

These  three  men  may  with  much  greater  propriety 
be  regarded  as  heralds  of  the  brighter  time.  All  re- 
ceived much  inspiration  from  classical  letters,  which 
they  knew  and  used  well  enough  to  propagate  their 
enthusiasm  therefor  as  a  rich  legacy  to  the  men  of  the 
full  Renaissance.  To  Boccaccio  especially  was  due  new 
interest  in  Greek.2  His  style  became  a  model  in 
prose  as  did  Petrarch's  in  poetry  and  prose  both.  Dante 
had  already  given  fixity  to  Italian,3  which  was  thus  the 
earliest  among  modern  languages  to  assume  a  national 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  265 

character.  But  Dante's  greatness  is  far  more  than  lit- 
erary. He  is  philosopher,  divine,  historian,  publicist. 
His  immortal  poem,  the  Divine  Comedy,4  in  style  as 
unique  as  in  contents  it  is  often  difficult,  sets  forth  the 
entire  body  of  mediaeval  ideas,  on  theology,  philosophy, 
natural  science,  astronomy,  history,  politics,  antiquity. 
Heaven,  hell  and  purgatory  as  well  as  earth  are  here 
ransacked,  and  the  simplest  of  the  matters  brought  to 
view,  made  to  reveal  deep  meanings.  Here  not  less 
than  in  the  poet's  De  Monarchia  we  have  his  political 
creed.  As  Beatrice,  personification  of  purity  and  love, 
thus  representing  a  spiritual  church,  guides  through 
paradise,  so  Vergil,  panegyrist  of  strong  earthly  empire 
and  emphasizing  the  deserts  of  such  as  oppose  this,  is 
made  to  conduct  through  hell.6  Yet  Dante  does  not 
thrust  forward  political  or  any  philosophy,  or  theology 
even,  to  the  lessening  of  poetic  power.  In  fact  litera- 
ture can  boast  not  more  than  two  poems  comparable 
with  the  Divine  Comedy.6 

1  Dante  lived  fr.  1263-1321,  Petrarch  I304~'74,  Boccaccio  1313— '75. 

2  He  tells  us  in  his  Genealogy  of  the  Gods  how  he  toiled  to  get  Leonzio 
Pilato  to  settle  at  Florence,  kept  him  for  years  in  his  own  house,  managed 
to  procure  classical  manuscripts  from  Greece  to  read  with  him  and  at  last 
saw  a  Greek  professorship  established  for  him  in  the  Tuscan  capital. 
Pilato  [§  5,  n.  3]  was  a  failure  and  remained  but  three  years.  Boccaccio 
and  Petrarch  seem  to  have  been  his  only  pupils  and  they  did  little. 
Petrarch  kissed  his  Homer  but  could  not  read  it.  With  so  incompetent  a 
teacher  their  zeal  cooled  instead  of  spreading.  Not  Italians  but  north- 
erners, like  Agricola,  Reuchlin,  Erasmus,  Budseus  and  the  Stephani,  were 
the  mighty  hellenists  of  the  Renaissance.  Burckhardt,  vol.  ii,  272  sq. 
Ariosto  knew  no  Greek  and  had  to  ask  Bembo  to  name  him  a  good  Greek 
tutor  for  his  son. 

3  What  Ennius  did  for  the  Latin  and  Luther  with  his  Bible  for  the 
High  German  Dante  accomplished  for  Italian.      Of  the  many  dialects 


266  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

existing   before,  he  fixed   the  Florentine  as  the  Italian  of  letters.    This 
momentous  result  was  accidental.    He  meant,  and  actually  begun,  to  write 
his  poem  in  Latin,  starting  off  in  Vergilian  style  and  measure :  '  Ultima 
regna  cano,'  etc.     Bembo  regretted  that  he  did  not  persevere. 
*  The  Divine  Comedy, 

'  This  poem  of  the  earth  and  air, 
This  mediaeval  miracle  of  song  '  (Longfellow.), 

although  taking  little  hold  of  Italy  on  first  appearing  [Michelet,  78,  165] 
quickly  assumed  a  headship  in  literature,  which  it  still  maintains.  Boc- 
caccio wrote  a  commentary  on  it,  so  early,  and  even  his  was  not  the 
earliest,  but  Grazio  di  Bologna's.  'The  reading  of  Dante,'  wrote  Mr. 
Gladstone,  Dec.  20,  1882,  'is  not  only  a  pleasure,  an  effort,  a  lesson;  it  is 
a  strong  discipline  of  the  heart,  the  intellect,  the  man.  In  the  school  of 
Dante  I  have  learned  a  very  great  part  of  that  mental  provision,  small  as 
it  may  be,  with  which  I  have  made  the  journey  of  human  life  until  nearly  73 
years  old.  He  who  serves  Dante  serves  Italy,  Christianity  and  the  world.' 
Yet  all  Dante's  philosophy  and  theology  are  mediaeval.  Vergil,  whom  he 
continually  styles  'our  divine  poet,'  cannot  guide  in  Paradise,  he  says, 
'  since  he  who  has  never  known  the  law  of  the  Lord  cannot  attain  the 
seats  of  the  blessed.'  Avicenna  and  Averroes,  with  Horace,  Lucan,  and 
it  would  seem  nearly  all  the  famous  heathen,  not  having  been  baptized, 
he  leaves  in  limbo.  Also,  as  de  Rossi  points  out,  neither  Dante  nor 
Petrarch  cares  aught  for  the  art  of  antiquity. 

6  Inferno  [canto  xxxiv]  has  both  Brutus  and  Cassius  in  hell.  It  puts 
no  emperor  there  save  Frederic  II  [canto  x].  Dante  lies  buried  at 
Ravenna,  but  Santa  Croce  in  his  native  Florence  holds  a  memorial  tablet 
to  him. 

6  The  Iliad  and  the  Paradise  Lost. 


§  5     Florence 

Symonds,  Rev.  of  Learning,  iv,  v,  vi.  Gt'bbon,  lxvi.  Capponi,  Storia  delta  rep.  di 
Firenze.  Roscoe,  Lorenzo  dei  Medici,  2  v.  Reumont,  do.  Villari,  Savonarola 
and  his  Times,  2  v.     Geiger,  I,  vi,  x. 

The  fifteenth  century  took  up  the  spirit  of  the  four- 
teenth, extending  and  intensifying  it.  Florence  became 
intellectually  what  she  already  was  politically,  a  second 
Athens.1    By  1400  some  ten  thousand  Florentine  chil- 


RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION  267 

dren  could  read,  nearly  six  hundred  were  studying  logic 
and  Latin.2  Boccaccio's  influence  had  drawn  Leonzio 
Pilato  thither  from  Venice  and  created  for  him  the  first 
Italian  professorship  of  Greek.3  Other  Greek  teachers 
came.  Greek  manuscripts  were  imported,  learned  By- 
zantines visited  Florence,  young  Florentines  went  to 
study  at  Constantinople.  The  Medici4  were  not  less 
zealous  in  aid  of  learning  and  culture  than  in  business 
and  their  conduct  of  the  state.  With  Poggio,  who  took 
the  lead,  vied  Niccoli,5  Bruni,  Traversari,  Ficino,  Valla 
and  Poliziano  in  the  discovery,  interpretation  and  pub- 
lication of  ancient  writings.  The  neglected  treasures 
of  Monte  Casino,  Cluny,  St.  Gall,  Fulda  were  brought 
to  the  light.6  Ancient  philosophy  was  studied  without 
theological  prejudice  and  from  the  sources :  how  suc- 
cessfully, Raphael's  School  of  Athens,  later,  shows.7 
Platonic  Academies  essayed  to  reconstruct  Christian 
doctrine  for  the  new  age.8  From  Florence  this  Renais- 
sance-spirit spread  through  Italy.  At  the  courts  of 
Naples  and  the  Lombard  tyrants  as  well  as  in  the  great 
republican  centres,  Siena,  Venice,  Genoa,  men  pored 
over  the  immortal  classics,  striving  through  reconstruc- 
tion of  the  great  past  to  create  for  themselves  a  more 
worthy  present.  By  Poggio  and  his  circle,  by  popes  like 
Nicholas  V,9  Julius  II  and  Leo  X,  the  Holy  See  itself 
was  brought  under  the  same  all-dominating  influence. 
From  Italy  it  passed  to  the  rest  of  Europe,  even  Hun- 
gary and  Poland.  The  power  of  mediaeval  traditions 
and  views  of  life,  of  mediaeval  ecclesiasticism,  was 
broken  forever. 

1  A  favorite  thought  with  Poliziano  and  Poggio  :  '  Athens  not  dead  but 
transferred  to  Florence.' —  Voigt,  I,  372,  II,  107.    Cf.  Hettner,  as  at  §  4, 


268  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

p.  241.  Only,  as  Grimm  says,  Athens  had  ten  great  men  to  Florence's 
one.  Florence  was  the  very  poorest  of  the  large  Italian  cities  in  antique 
monuments  and  ruins.  In  classical  times  it  was  an  insignificant  place. 
Symonds  likens  Venice  to  Sparta,  as  Florence  to  Athens. 

2  The  figures  are  from  Villani. 

8  Cf.  §  4,  n.  1.  Greek  was  the  great  innovation  now,  the  Latin  classics 
having  never  been  quite  unknown  at  the  Italian  capitals.  Pilato,  not  a 
native  Hellene,  any  more  than  Barlaamo  [Voigt,  II,  108  sqq.],  had  small 
Greek  and  no  good  Latin.  He  derived  'Ax^tevs  from  alpha  privative  and 
XiXta,  at '  the  fodderless ' !  His  translation  of  Homer  was  verbatim,  full 
of  errors  and  nearly  useless  [§  4,  n.  1]. 

4  Voigt,  I,  295  sqq. 

6  Voigt,  I,  237  sqq.,  406.  On  costliness  of  books  at  this  time,  ibid., 
404  sq.  Poggio  was  the  first  humanist  to  get  and  keep  favor  at  the  papal 
court,  Niccoli  to  conceive  the  thought  of  a  public  library. 

6  See  §  2,  n.  2.  The  revival  of  learning  passed  through  the  periods 
of  i)  passionate  imitation  of  antiquity,  represented  by  Petrarch  and  Boc- 
caccio, ii)  acquisition,  libraries,  gathering  old  Mss.,  regardless  of  their  worth, 
and  iii)  scholarship,  sifting,  editing,  wherein  Poliziano,  Ficino,  Erasmus 
and  such  were  so  useful.     Symonds,  Despots,  24. 

7  This  great  painting  tells  the  entire  story  of  Greek  philosophy.  The 
artists  of  the  Renaissance  understood  old  history  and  literature  better  than 
many  moderns.  Thus  Michel  Angelo's  statue  of  David  is  the  best  com- 
mentary extant  on  the  O.  T.  idea  of  David  as  a  youth,  —  not  a  weakling, 
but  a  giant. 

8  Bezold,  Hist.  Zeitschrifi,  vol.  xlix,  2d  art.  It  was  new  Platonism 
rather  than  old.  The  Gmculi  esurientes  as  they  were  called,  i.e.,  Pilato 
and  those  of  his  kind  who  subsequently  fled  westward  from  the  face  of 
the  conquering  Turk,  are  not  to  be  credited  with  bringing  Plato  to  Italy. 
Most  of  them  did  not  even  know  Plato.  Petrarch  already  had  16  Platonic 
writings,  of  which  Bruni  translated  several.  Cosmo  dei  Medici  formed  his 
Academy  and  trained  Ficino  on  purpose  to  get  Plato  and  Plotinus  known 
in  and  from  their  own  speech.  On  the  revival  of  Platonism,  Whewell,  H. 
of  Ind.  Sciences,  bk.  xii,  ch.  viii. 

*  On  this  excellent  pope,  see  Creighton,  IV,  iv,  Voigt,  Wiederbel.,  bk. 
v,  Gibbon,  as  above,  Milman,  vol.  viii,  121  sqq.  He  founded  the  Vatican 
Library,  1453.     For  the  others,  Symonds,  Despots,  315  sqq. 


renaissance  and  reformation  269 

§  6    Dark  Side  of  the  Renaissance 

Symonds,  Rev.  of  Learning,  v-viii.     Voigt,  Wiederbelebung,  II,  15  sqq. 

Naturally  enough  the  rage  for  classical  things  some- 
times exceeded  bounds.1  Bembo,  the  favorite  cardinal 
of  Leo  X,  the  same  who  used  to  swear  '  by  the  immor- 
tal gods,'  abhorred  sermons  and  the  Pauline  letters, 
their  matter  and  style  were  so  bad.  He  believed  that 
nothing  new  could  be  created  in  literature,  that  writers 
must  simply  imitate  Cicero  and  Petrarch.  Bembo's 
famous  epitaph 2  to  Raphael  might  for  perfect  latinity 
and  exquisite  beauty  have  come  from  Vergil,  for  pan- 
theistic sentiment,  from  Lucretius.  Cardinal  Bessarion 
comforted  certain  orphans  by  assuring  them  that  their 
father  '  had  gone  to  the  place  of  the  pure,  to  dance  the 
mystic  Iacchos  with  the  gods  of  Olympus.'  Carraro, 
protonotary  of  Pope  Eugene  IV,  adapted  passages  of 
Horace  to  the  purpose  of  Christian  worship.3  An  ora- 
tion before  the  University  of  Ingoldstadt,  1502,  calls 
Plato  second  Moses,  physician  of  the  soul,  the  inspirer 
of  all  highest  moral  striving,  and  ranges  Zoroaster, 
Linus,  Orpheus,  Empedocles,  Parmenides  and  other 
heathen  celebrities  on  a  level  with  Moses,  David  and 
the  prophets.  Conservatives  were  led  to  denounce 
Plato,  Averroes  and  Alexander  of  Aphrodisia4  as  the 
three  pests  of  Italy.  Some  humanists  in  high  places 
not  only  forgot  but  transgressed  Christian  law.  Popes 
lived  like  Nero  and  cursed  by  Jupiter  and  Venus.  In 
inner  rooms  of  the  Lateran,  papal  secretaries  who  had 
spent  the  day  in  deciphering  inscriptions  or  glossing 
manuscripts,  devoted  nights  to  carousing  and  plays  of 
filthy  wit,  touching  pope,  church  and  the  most  sacred, 


270  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

as  well  as  all  manner  of  worldly  things.  They  named 
their  club  the  ' bugiale,' or  'smithy  of  lies.'  Such  was 
the  midnight  pastime  of  that  apostolic  circle  from  whose 
pens  solemn  bulls  and  breves  would  next  morning  issue.6 

1  Pedants  delighted  in  addressing  municipal  counsellors  as  patres  con- 
scripti,  calling  every  saint  a  divus  or  a  deus,  nuns  virgines  vestales,  cardi- 
nals senatores,  their  dean  princeps  senalus,  excommunications  dirae,  the 
carnival  Lupercalia,  etc.  The  soldiers  of  the  French  army  in  1512  were 
said  to  be  omnibus  diris  ad  infernos  devocati. — Burckhardt,  I,  353. 
Petrarch  set  more  by  his  Latin  poetry  than  by  his  sonnets  and  canzoni, 
and  Ariosto  was  urged  by  some  to  write  in  Latin.  Bembo  evidently 
thought  Latin  destined  to  be  to  all  time  the  sole  language  of  literary  con- 
verse. 

2  Over  Raphael's  tomb  in  the  Pantheon.     It  reads: 

Ille  hie  est  Raphael  timuit  quo  sospite  vinci 
Rerum  magna  parens  et  moriente  mori. 

8  He  availed  himself  among  others  of  Ode  xii,  Book  I,  turning  gentis 
humana  pater  atque  custos,  into  gentis  humana  pater  et  redemptor.  '  On 
his  death-bed  Cosmo  de  Medici  is  attended  by  Ficino,  who  assures  him  of 
another  life  on  the  authority  of  Socrates,  and  teaches  resignation  in  the 
words  of  Plato,  Zenocrates  and  other  Athenian  sages.'  Milman.  Pletho, 
during  the  Council  of  Florence,  i438-'42,  avowed  to  George  of  Trebizond 
his  conviction  that  men  were  upon  the  point  of  renouncing  both  gospel 
and  Koran  for  some  form  of  heathen  religion. 

4  One  of  the  most  famous  of  the  commentators  on  Aristotle,  his  views 
of  his  master,  however,  tinged  with  New-Platonism. 

6  Poggio  relates  it  all  himself,  and  he  was  the  ring-leader.  Voigt,  II, 
15  sqq.  It  was  the  age  of  flippancy  in  both  speech  and  writing.  'Bur- 
lesque' is  from  the  name  of  a  Florentine  barber,  Domenico  Burchiello 
[d.  1448],  who  composed  funnily  satirical  sonnets. 

§  7    Renaissance  Literature 

Symonds,  IV,  V,  Italian  Literature.     Weber,  II,  140  sqq.    '  Machiavelli  and  his  Times,' 
Westm.  Rev.,  Jan.,  1879.     Sismondi,  Lit.  of  So.  Europe,  chaps,  xii-xv. 

The  Italian  literature  of  the  Renaissance  proper,  rich 
as  it  is  in  quantity  and  variety,  is  not  in  quality  what 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  2J\ 

the  prodigious  intellectual  life  of  the  time  and  the  in- 
spiration awakened  by  so  large  acquaintance  with  the 
classics  would  lead  us  to  expect.  Only  a  few  of  its 
products  can  criticism  declare  great.  Among  these 
Guicciardini's  History  of  Italy  1  may  perhaps  be  placed, 
and  certainly  Machiavelli's  writings,  whatever  opinion 
we  may  have  of  their  ethics.  The  meaning  of  his 
'  Prince,'  is  not  that  such  a  ruler  is  intrinsically  desira- 
ble, but,  in  the  then  condition  of  Italy,  necessary  to 
solid  national  government,  a  judgment  apparently  true, 
assuredly  sad.  The  names  of  Boiardo,  Ariosto  and 
Tasso2  have  passed  into  the  literary  history  of  the 
world.  The  Orlando  Inamorato  and  the  Orlando  Furi- 
oso  re-work,  only  in  a  far  richer  way  than  had  yet  been 
done,  the  old  sagas  touching  Karl  the  Great's  famous 
Paladin,  Roland.  The  former  poem  is  the  more  serious 
and  moral,  the  latter  the  more  flippant,  imaginative 
and  finely  expressed.  Tasso  with  his  Jerusalem  Deliv- 
ered, in  which  the  first  crusade  is  handled  as  the  Trojan 
war  is  by  Homer  and  Vergil,  falls  far  behind  Ariosto, 
whom  he  strove  to  excel.  The  small  bulk  of  Italy's 
truly  worthy  literature  in  this  period  is  due  to  a  moral 
lack.  It  was  Epicurean,  not  Stoic,  antiquity  which 
the  Italian  humanists  raised  from  the  dead.  Authors 
were  chiefly  courtiers,  and  of  a  most  sycophantic  type. 
Ariosto  glorifies  Lucrezia  Borgia;3  Machiavelli,  Caesar. 
Tasso,  twice  insulted  and  imprisoned  by  his  patron,  the 
Duke  of  Ferrara,  whines  to  be  restored  to  favor.  Not 
strange  that  the  seer  to  divine  and  declare  the  real  sig- 
nificance of  the  Renaissance  movement,  was  no  Renais- 
sance poet  or  literator  but  an  artist.4  In  the  Stanza 
delta  segnatura  of  the  Vatican,  in  his  magnificent  paint- 


272  RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION 

ings,  the  'Dispute,'  'Parnassus,'  'School  of  Athens' 
and  '  Delivery  of  the  Laws,'  Raphael  voiced  the  most 
characteristic  message  of  the  Renaissance  to  man,  that 
Revelation,  Philosophy,  Culture  and  Law,  Church  and 
State,  each  divine  in  its  way,  are  ordained  of  God  to 
exist  together  in  harmony.6 

1  Translated,  in  10  v.  Cf.  Symonds,  Despots,  iv.  For  Machiavelli, 
ibid.,  iv,  v,  and  Sismondi,  ch.  xv.  Cf.  Bohn's  tr.,  or  Detmold's  ed.  of  M.'s 
historical,  pol.  and  diplomatic  works,  Boston,  1882.  Machiavelli  says  that 
it  is  not  necessary  a  prince  should  be  merciful,  loyal,  humane,  religious, 
just,  that  if  he  had  all  these  qualities  and  always  displayed  them  they 
would  harm  him.  But  he  must  seem  to  have  them,  especially  if  he  be 
new  in  his  principality.  It  will  be  as  useful  to  him  to  keep  the  path  of 
rectitude  when  this  is  not  inconvenient  as  to  know  how  to  deviate  from 
it  when  circumstances  dictate.  A  prudent  prince  cannot  and  ought  not  to 
keep  his  word  except  when  he  can  do  it  without  injury  to  himself.  Prince, 
ch.  xviii.  The  devil's  appellation  of  Old  Nick  he  is  said  to  have  gotten 
from  Machiavelli  [Nicholas],  in  view  of  sentiments  like  the  above.  For 
the  basis  of  our  interpretation,  see  Prince,  ch.  xxvi. 

2  On  these  three  writers,  Tiraboschi,  XII,  iii,  Hallam,  Lit.  of  Europe, 
pt.  ii,  chaps,  v,  vii,  Symonds,  vol.  v,  chaps,  i,  ix,  Sismondi,  as  above. 
Ariosto's  perfection  is  limpidity  of  style,  the  result  of  toil.  He  spent  ten 
years  in  writing  his  poem  and  sixteen  in  polishing.  The  autograph  copy 
at  Ferrara  shows  page  after  page  of  alterations  [Symonds].  He  is  always 
equal  to  his  best.  Yet  both  he  and  Boiardo  have  some  obscurities,  and 
some  passages  against  church  and  clergy,  which  house-chaplains  in  pious 
families  used  to  paste  over,  —  to  make  the  children,  Weber  says,  more 
anxious  to  read  them.  The  Inamorato  and  the  Furioso  are  parts  of  the 
same  story,  —  a  very  old  story  already  [on  the  Roland-cycle,  Weber, 
§§421,  428,  429].  Roland,  whom  previous  writers  had  set  forth  as  pas- 
sionless arid  above  frailty,  Boiardo  makes  fall  in  love  with  Angelica,  an 
infidel  coquette  come  from  Asia  to  sow  discord  among  Christians;  Ariosto 
goes  on  to  represent  the  fair  one  as  deserting  Roland  for  Medoro,  a  young 
squire,  and  Roland  crazed  with  jealousy  thereat.  Symonds's  chaps,  vii 
and  viii  in  Catholic  Reaction  relate  to  Tasso. 

8  Calling  her  'a  second  Lucrece,  brighter  for  her  virtues  than  the  star 
of  regal  Rome.'  Gregorovius,  Lucrezia  Borgia,  apologizes  for  this  famous 
woman  with  some  show  of  success,  exhibiting  her  as  weak  rather  than  bad. 


RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION  273 

Grimm,  however,  M.  Angelo,  I,  171,  thinks  G.'s  effort  fatuous.  The  Borgia 
name  and  family  were  Spanish  [Borja].  Caesar  is  openly  the  hero  of 
Machiavelli's  Prince.  Petrarch  showed  little  moral  strength,  —  archdeacon 
in  the  church  and  ceaselessly  excoriating  the  clergy  for  vices,  yet  himself 
not  always  chaste,  devoting  over  300  sonnets  and  the  best  20  years  of  his 
life  to  moping  over  an  unrequited  love.  'Ed  to  son  un  di  quei  che  il 
pianger  giova,'  he  wrote.  Boccaccio  was  at  a  still  lower  level,  vulgar  and 
sensual. 

4  Hettner.  The  Dispute  exalts  theology,  as  the  School  of  Athens  does 
philosophy,  the  Parnassus  music,  poetry  and  all  culture,  and  the  Delivery 
of  the  Laws  [civil  and  canon],  justice.  In  the  room  the  Dispute  and  the 
School  of  Athens  face  each  other.  So  do  the  remaining  two,  culture  and 
justice.  '  Room  of  Signature '  because  here  the  pope  signed  solemn  offi- 
cial papers. 

8  Yet  Pinturicchio  and  Perugino  thought  it  no  shame  to  work  for 
princes  like  the  Baglioni  and  popes  like  Alexander  VI  [§  14].  Da  Vinci 
was  engineer  for  Caesar  Borgia,  musician  and  painter  to  the  corrupt  Mila- 
nese court  under  the  Sforzas;  and  that  gentle  spirit,  Alberti,  devoted  his 
architectural  genius  to  the  beautifying  of  Malatesta's  palace  at  Rimini. 


§  8    Art 

Rtber,  Mediaeval  Art  [Harper,  1887].    Scott,  Renaissance  of  Art. 
Symonds,  Fine  Arts,  i. 

Renaissance  art  varies  from  that  which  it  supplanted, 
by  its  infinitely  greater  beauty,  exuberance,  variety  and 
naturalness.  Traditional  subjects  and  the  old  stiff 
modes  of  treatment  no  longer  give  law.  Motion  enters 
the  domain  of  art-representation.  The  beauty  of  saints 
and  angels  is  made  to  heighten  the  expression  of  their 
holiness.  Artists  no  longer  neglect  or  degrade  the  hu- 
man body  as  a  mere  unworthy  tenement  of  the  spirit, 
but  study  and  delineate  it  as  noble  in  itself.  Graceful 
postures  and  movements,  and  lovely  landscapes  are  intro- 
troduced.  The  world  and  man  assume  a  strange  air  of 
joyousness.     In  fine,  art  casts  quite  aside  its  old  ascetic 


274  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

and  pessimistic  spirit.  Artists  now  astonish  not  only 
by  their  numbers,  but  also  by  both  their  range  and  their 
profundity  of  genius.  Giotto,  Angelo  and  Raphael 1  were 
each  masters  of  the  three  great  arts,  Angelo  poet  and 
engineer  besides.  Da  Vinci's  genius  was  more  univer- 
sal still.  In  point  here  is  the  fact  that  painting,  totally 
lacking  that  classical  stimulus  so  helpful  to  architecture 
and  sculpture,  was  now  the  field  of  the  most  copious 
production.  But  in  all  art,  besides  new  cycles  of  sacred 
subjects,  mythical,  classical  and  profane-historical  ones 
are  introduced,  the  old  themes  handled  in  a  free  way, 
subjected  to  limitless  variations.  Draperies  are  com- 
posed, actions  and  expressions  suited  to  subjects  and  to 
moments.  Apostles,  prophets,  saints  are  now  portrayed 
as  actual  human  beings,  Madonna  and  child,  with  Joseph 
and  the  little  John,  image  real  domestic  experience. 
The  sacred  blends  with  the  natural,  heaven  comes  down 
to  earth.  In  these  ways  the  love  of  beauty  and  the 
interests  of  our  present  life  are  brought  to  mingle  with 
the  devotion  inspired  by  the  art,  which  thus  acts  to 
deliver  from  narrow  and  distorted  religiousness.  Much 
of  the  new  architecture  and  sculpture,  especially  An- 
gelo's,  was  characterized  by  a  strength  and  grandeur 
never  before  attained. 

1  Pater's  book  has  a  chapter  on  his  poetry,  also  one  on  da  Vinci.  The 
latter  was  a  universal  genius,  equally  great  in  arts  and  sciences,  in  paint- 
ing, sculpture,  poetry,  music,  botany,  anatomy,  mathematics,  mechanics, 
and  engineering.  'The  discoveries  which  made  Galileo,  Kepler,  Maestlin 
Maurolycus,  Castelli  and  other  names  equally  illustrious,  the  system  of 
Copernicus,  the  very  theories  of  recent  geologers,  are  anticipated  by  da 
Vinci.'  —  Hallam.  He  depicts  horses  as  natural  as  Rubens's,  far  more 
lifelike  and  modern  than  those  of  Raphael,  who  follows  the  antique. 
Giotto,  like  Lysippus  of  old,  was  a  goldsmith  before  he  became  a  sculptor, 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  275 

and  Lorenzo  Ghiberti  worked  in  the  precious  metals  at  the  bench  of  his 
step-father,  Bartoluccio,  ere  he  carried  off  the  prize  for  the  paradise-doors 
of  San  Giovanni  from  geniuses  of  the  dignity  of  Brunelleschi  and  Dona- 
tello.  Raphael  modelled  little,  but  perfectly,  as  the  Jonah  of  the  Chigi 
Chapel  in  S.  Maria  del  Popolo,  which  Gsellfels  thinks  he  chiselled  as  well. 
He  designed  the  Chapel  itself,  with  several  other  buildings,  and  was  head- 
architect  to  St.  Peter's  between  Bramante  and  Angelo.  He  was  least  at 
home  in  architecture.  See  Miintz's  Raphael.  Miintz  is  director  of  the 
Bibliotheqne  international  de  Part,  which  contains  the  best  books  extant 
on  the  origins  of  art,  as  well  as  much  els.e  on  mediaeval  culture.  See  at 
end  of  his  Precurseurs. 


§  9    Architecture  and  Sculpture 

Milman,  XIV,  viii,  ix.    Fergusson,  Modern  Architecture.    Symonds,  Fine  Arts,  ii-viii. 
Michelet,  Int.,  §  x  and  note.     Weber,  II,  27  sqq.     'Architecture,'  in  Encyc.  Brit. 

Architecture  was  the  first  art  to  defy  tradition,  an 
effect  partly  accounted  for  in  that :  I  Innovations  in 
it  were  little  liable  to  the  charge  of  heterodoxy.  2  To 
the  large  number  of  ancient  buildings  already  known  in 
Italy,  new  were  now  added  by  excavations,  and  all  ren- 
dered more  influential  by  study.  3  No  architectural 
style  had  here  become  strict  law.  The  Byzantine  pre- 
vailed in  South  Italy,  the  Gothic  only  in  the  North, 
neither  in  Rome,1  where  a  Romanesque  fashion  had  un- 
consciously continued.  The  Baptistery  in  Florence, 
finished  by  1300,  gives  fore-gleams  of  the  Renaissance, 
especially  in  its  'paradise-doors.'  The  Cathedral  there, 
with  its  immense  horizontal  spaces,  strives  away  from 
the  Gothic,2  which  Giotto's  tower  retains  only  in  its 
ornament.  Renaissance  architecture  proper  owes  the 
most  to  Brunelleschi's  initiative,  who  boldly  introduced 
vaulting3  in  the  Florence  Cathedral,  and  gave  the  flat 
basilica4  ceiling  to  the  nave  of  San  Lorenzo.     The  laws 


276  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

of  Vitruvius6  were  now  generally  introduced,  palaces 
completely  romanized,  churches  brought  back  more  to 
that  pattern  which,  save  transept  and  dome  or  tower, 
had  been  borrowed  from  the  Roman  basilica  and  is  still 
dominant  in  the  churches  of  Western  Christendom. 
Of  this  new  mode  of  building,  the  centre  was  Rome, 
where  Bramante6  begun,  Angelo  completed,  its  most 
splendid  representative,  St.  Peter's.  Contemporane- 
ously with  Angelo  wrought  Palladio,  mainly  in  Venice, 
Verona  and  Genoa,  famous  still  for  palaces  wherewith 
his  skill  adorned  them.  In  sculpture  as  well  as  in  archi- 
tecture, Michel  Angelo  is  the  greatest  name,  his  David, 
Moses  and  Night  equalling,  if  they  do  not  surpass,  the 
most  splendid  of  antique  statues. 

1  The  Gothic  came  from  France  to  Italy.  Santa  Maria  sopra  Minerva, 
begun  in  1280,  is  the  only  Gothic  church  in  Rome,  and  what  critics  regard 
the  purest  Gothic  exists  nowhere  in  Italy.  The  home  of  this  species  of 
architecture  was  north  of  the  Alps. 

2  Whose  peculiarity  is  vertical  lines  and  an  upward  tendency,  toward 
heaven :  this  taking  effect  not  in  the  points,  turrets  and  acute  arches 
alone,  but  every  wise.  Michelet  is  no  friend  of  the  Gothic,  thinking  it 
unscientific,  cheap,  ever  needing  repairs.  —  Int.,  §  x. 

8  This  and  arching  constituting  the  main  features  of  the  Romanesque. 
On  the  competition  between  Brunelleschi  and  Ghiberti,  first  about  the 
Baptistery-doors,  then  upon  finishing  the  Cathedral,  Grimm,  M.  Angelo, 
I,  6,  Michelet,  Int.,  §  x.  Michel  Angelo,  being  asked  where  he  wished 
to  be  buried,  replied,  'Where  I  can  eternally  contemplate  the  work  of 
Brunelleschi.'  Michelet  adores  Brunelleschi  and  deems  this  dome  of  his 
finer  than  Angelo's  on  St.  Peter's.  Wren  outdid  both  in  his  dome  of  St. 
Paul's,  London. 

4  The  basilica  was  the  Roman  court-house.  It  was  oblong,  with  nave 
[testudo]  and  aisles,  nave  being  separated  from  aisles  by  rows,  sometimes 
double  rows,  of  pillars.  These  justice-halls  naturally  served  as  models  for 
churches  and  imparted  to  these  their  name.  The  tribunal  or  judge's  place, 
opposite  the  door,  became  the  apse,  holding  the  bishop's  throne,  separated 
from  the  nave  by  the  fence  of  open  work,  which  retained  its  old  name, 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  277 

cancelli.    The  altar  of  Apollo  just  behind  the  cancelli  gave  way  to  the 
communion  table.     See  '  Church,'  in  Smith's  Die.  of  Christian  Antiqq. 

5  A  military  engineer  of  the  time  of  Augustus.  He  left  a  work  on 
Architecture,  mostly  from  Greek  sources. 

6  Tiraboschi,  IX,  vii. 

§  10    Painting 

Milman,  XIV,  ix.     Grimm,  If.  Angelo,  ch.  xii.     Symonds,  Cath.  Reaction,  ch.  xiii. 

The  new  Italian  painting  soared  highest,  unquestion- 
ably outdoing  the  Greek.  Cimabue,1  who  astonished  the 
world  by  painting  a  Madonna  as  a  real  and  beautiful 
woman,  led  in  point  of  time,  his  pupil  Giotto,  Ruskin's 
idol,  coming  next.  Massaccio,2  another  mighty  pre- 
Raphaelite,  advanced  not  a  little  upon  his  predecessors 
in  mastery  of  light,  shade,  color  and  drapery.  He  made 
subjects  live,  breathe,  speak.  For  delineating  spiritual 
beauty  Fra  Angelico  is  unequalled.  Michel  Angelo's 
great  paintings3  in  the  Sistine  Chapel  of  the  Vatican, 
awful  in  conception,  miracles  of  execution,  are  among 
the  chief  glories  of  art  creation.  But  Raphael  is  the 
foremost  painter  of  all  the  ages,  his  Sistine  Madonna 
standing  in  unapproachable  excellence  upon  the  topmost 
pinnacle  of  art.  He  is  as  prolific  as  he  is  consummate, 
yet  in  neither  respect  so  wonderful  as  in  his  restless 
effort  toward  an  ever-advancing  ideal.  Tizian,  Paolo 
Veronese,  Lionardo  da  Vinci  and  Coreggio,  contem- 
porary with  the  two  preceding,  were  artists,  any  one  of 
whom  would  have  appeared  a  miracle  to  a  less  brilliant 
age.  If  the  seventeenth  century  betrays  some  decline 
in  strength,  originality  and  morality,  Guido  Reni  and 
Carlo  Dolci  at  least  keep  on  high  the  sense  of  beauty, 
Dolci's  Corsini  Madonna  being  in  this  quite  without  a 
rival. 


278  RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION 

1  Cimabue  1 240-1302,  Giotto  1 276-1337,  Massaccio  1401-28,  da  Vinci 
1452-15 19,  Fra  Angelico  1474-1563,  Michel  Angelo  1475-1564,  Tizian 
1477-1576,  Raphael  1483-1520,  Correggio  1494-1534,  Paul  of  Verona 
i528-'88,  Guido  Reni  1575-1642,  Carlo  Dolci  i6i6-'86. 

2  To  both  Massaccio  in  his  frescoes  in  the  Carmine,  Florence,  and 
Cimabue  in  his  so  human  Madonna  of  S.  Maria  Novella,  the  problem  is 
to  represent  saintliness  without  giving  to  the  figure  the  cold  and  stiff  ap- 
pearance characteristic  of  the  Byzantine  style.  Each  solves  it,  but  M. 
much  better  than  C. 

3  'Michel,  piu  che  mortale,  angel  divino'  [Ariosto],  said  he  was  no 
painter  and  painted  under  protest.  His  painting  is  not  confined  to  the 
Sistine  Chapel.  He  has  a  Conversion  of  Paul  and  a  Crucifixion  of  Peter 
in  the  Paolina  Chapel  of  the  Vatican.  He  also  painted  the  Madonna 
under  the  Cross  for  Vittoria  Colonna,  and,  in  his  early  years,  —  his  only 
easel  picture,  —  the  Holy  Family  in  the  Tribuna  of  the  UfHzi,  Florence. 
The  Last  Judgment,  Sistine  Chapel,  is  his  most  lauded  work  with  the 
brush.  Ruskin  says  that,  other  things  equal,  it  requires  higher  art  to  paint 
a  large  than  a  small  picture. 


§  11    The  Renaissance  European 

Symonds,  Despots,  i.  Hallam,  Lit.,  pt.  i,  ch.  ii.  Voigt,  Wiederbelebung,  Int.  Tira- 
boschi,  V,  iii,  VII,  iv.  Ruge  [in  Oncken],  Zeitalter  d.  Entdeckungen.  Prowe, 
Nicolaus  Copernicus. 

Not  surprising  that  Italy  saw  the  dawn  of  the  new 
age  and,  in  some  respects,  its  fullest  day.  Italy  was  the 
chief  heir  of  the  classical  world,1  the  chief  centre  of 
mediaeval  civilization.  It  was  also  the  earliest  land  to 
acquire  wealth,  that  indispensable  prerequisite  to  leisure 
for  thought  and  study.  Here  too  feudalism  was  feeble,2 
liberty  first  had  birth.  Here  almost  alone  in  the  middle 
age  was  liberty  enjoyed.  Lastly  the  whole  mediaeval 
history  of  Italy,  so  stormy  and  changeful,  was  calculated 
to  nurse  individuality,  inventiveness,  daring.  It  thus 
became  possible  for  Italy  to  bear  the  brunt  of  the 
Renaissance   struggle,  doing   in   this   a  work  without 


RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION  279 

which  no  subsequent  progress  could  have  been  made. 
Yet  the  Renaissance  was  not  confined  to  Italy.  It  was 
European.  All  Western  humanity  now  started  up  to 
put  away  childish  things.  Thought,  renouncing  pre- 
scription and  mere  formal  work,3  was  set  free  for  effort 
in  a  hundred  new  directions.  The  telescope,  already 
known  to  the  Arabs,  Roger  Bacon  described  to  Europe 
in  1250.  The  compass  was  brought  to  light  in  1302, 
linen  paper  and  gunpowder  about  1320.  Printing 
triumphs  in  1438,  and  in  less  than  a  century  Vergil, 
Homer,  Aristotle  and  Plato  appear  in  noble  editions. 
America  is  discovered  in  1492,  the  Cape  rounded  in 
1497.  Copernicus  4  re-thinks  the  solar  system  in  1507, 
proves  the  revolution  of  the  earth  in  1530.  Savonarola 
closes  the  fifteenth  century,  Luther  opens  the  sixteenth, 
which,  going  out,  leaves  behind  Boehme,  Bacon,  Grotius, 
Hobbes  and  Descartes.5  In  this  same  period  feudalism 
gave  way  and  absolute  monarchy  rose  in  France,  Spain, 
England,  Austria  and  Turkey.6  Equally  mistaken  is  it 
to  derive  the  Renaissance  causally  from  any  external 
event,  as  the  fall  of  Constantinople  and  the  consequent 
hegira  of  Greek  scholars 7  to  Italy,  although  several  of 
the  above-named  effects  unquestionably  became  causes 
in  time.  Thus,  printing  incalculably  spread  and  stimu- 
lated intelligence,  and  the  influence  of  Columbus  and 
Copernicus  reached  philosophy  and  theology.  God  and 
his  universe  were  seen  to  be  greater  than  men  had 
dreamed.  The  time-honored,  ever-ready  explanations 
of  things  no  longer  sufficed.  Far-reaching  questions 
pressed  for  answer.  One  could  ask  whether  man, 
whether  this  world,  were  really  the  centre  of  the  divine 
plan. 


280  RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION 

1  Voigt  notices  that  Italy  not  only  bridged  the  way  from  classical  to 
ecclesiastical  Rome,  but  also  led  in  the  reverse  movement  from  ecclesiasti- 
cism  to  antiquity.     In  Italy  paganism  in  fact  never  died. 

2  Ch.  VI,  §  14. 

8  Formal  work,  the  mind  exerting  its  powers  on  premises  already  given 
by  revelation,  merely  deducing  and  unfolding  the  contents  thereof  [formal 
logic],  instead  of  discovering  actually  new  truth  [real  logic].  Mental 
hunger  began  after  the  truth  itself,  cognition  of  realities  objectively  and  in 
se,  as  distinct  from  mere  subjective  and  external  apprehension.     Cf.  §  13. 

*  Vernacular  name  Koppernigk.  He  was  a  Pole,  born  at  Thorn,  in 
Prussia,  1473,  and  died  in  1543.     His  work  did  not  appear  till  1543. 

6  On  these  philosophers  we  must  refer  to  Ueberweg  and  the  other 
Histories  of  Philosophy.  Symonds's  ch.  ix,  in  Catholic  Reaction,  is  on 
Giordano  Bruno.     He  lived  1550-1600. 

6  For  the  significance  of  this,  Ch.  IV,  §  16.  Merging  the  state  in  the 
king  and  the  church  in  the  pope  ushered  in  the  last  age  of  feudalism,  and 
formed  the  prelude  to  that  drama  of  liberty  wherein  Renaissance  was  the 
first  act,  Reformation  the  second  and  Revolution  the  third,  and  which  we 
nations  of  the  present  are  still  evolving  in  establishing  the  democratic  idea. 
—  Symonds,  Despots,  9. 

7  Their  advent  of  course  had  its  effect,  but  it  was  relatively  slight.  The 
Greek  comers  were  mainly  unlearned  men.  The  state  of  Greek  letters  at 
Constantinople,  1400-1500,  is  even  now  very  imperfectly  known.  Greek 
was  certainly  cultivated  there,  and  old  Greek  manuscripts  were  as  plentiful 
there  as  old  Latin  ones  in  and  near  Rome.  Classical  Greek  had  not  be- 
come a  dead  language.  The  stability  of  the  court  and  of  schools  aided 
literature.  Monks,  clergy,  schoolmasters  and  isolated  savans  preserved 
precious  old  writings,  as  in  the  West.  Xenophon,  Strabo,  Plutarch  and 
Arrian  were  continually  copied  and  read.  Chrysolaras,  George  of  Trebi- 
zond,  Theodore  of  Gaza,  Bessarion  and  Laskaris  were  critical  scholars  and 
b*d  some  peers,  but  not  many,  —  Voigt,  II,  102  sqq, 


§  12  The  Renaissance  beyond  Italy 

*eiger,  bk.  ii.     Hallam,  Lit.,  pt.  i.     Lubke,  Renaissance  in  Deutschland.    Bezold, 
'  Conrad  Celtis',  Hist.  Zeitschr.,  1883.     Weber,  II,  21  sqq.    Janssen,  vol.  ii,  bk.  i. 

The  Renaissance  assumed  consequence  beyond  the 
Alps  only  toward  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century.1 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  28 1 

France  felt  Italy  soonest  and  most.  Italian  artists2 
and  literators  visited  that  land,  Charles  VIII's  soldiers 
carried  home  the  spirit  of  the  country  they  overran.3 
The  sixteenth  century  produced  several  French  artists 
of  high  rank,4  none,  however,  reaching  the  perfection  of 
the  Dutch  painters,  the  brothers  van  Eyck,  in  the  pre- 
ceding. Hans  Holbein  the  Younger  was  the  first  non- 
Italian  to  do  this,  his  Darmstadt5  Madonna  belonging 
among  the  very  small  number  of  consummate  master- 
pieces. The  works  of  Diirer,6  Rubens,  Rembrandt  and 
van  Dyck  still  delight  all  beholders.  In  Germany  and 
in  the  North  generally,  the  inspiration  begotten  of  the 
Renaissance  tended  more  to  study,  thought  and  reform 
than  to  art.  Universities  were  founded  and  filled,  clubs 
of  humanists  formed,  breadth  of  view  cultivated,  an 
astounding  mass  of  learning  acquired.  Reuchlin,7  Eras- 
mus, von  Hutten  and  Melancthon  were  foremost  in 
these  activities,  and  to  them  in  more  than  one  respect, 
the  modern  world  owes  an  immeasurable  debt.  They 
fought  obscurants,  discovered  and  verified  manuscripts, 
corrected  texts,  made  commentaries.  Erasmus  was  the 
first  modern  to  edit  the  Greek  New  Testament :  there 
is  scarcely  a  prominent  Greek  or  Latin  classic  which 
Melancthon  did  not  expound. 

1  There  were  no  literary  products  of  value  north  of  the  Alps  in  the 
15th  century  save  those  of  Commines  and  Sir  John  Fortescue. 

2  Leonardo  da  Vinci,  Andrea  del  Sarto  and  Benvenuto  Cellini  each 
spent  some  time  at  Francis  I's  court.  Laskaris  went  from  Florence  to 
Paris,  helped  to  form  the  royal  library  of  Fontainebleau  and  to  introduce 
Greek  into  the  University  of  Paris. 

3  On  this  monarch's  Italian  expedition,  Symonds,  Despots,  ch.  ix.  It 
was  from  1493-98,  he  taking  Naples  in  1495,  Dut  holding  it  onty  a  few 
months. 


282  RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION 

4  Goujon  and  Pilon  have  been  called  the  fathers  of  French  sculpture. 
The  former  was  killed  in  the  Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew. 

6  Subject  and  treatment  are  the  same  as  those  of  his  Madonna  in  the 
Dresden  Gallery,  but  critics  regard  the  Darmstadt  exemplar  the  older. 

6  Grimm,  '  Albrecht  Diirer '  in  his  vol.  of  translated  essays,  and  Zahn, 
Durer's  Kunstlehre  u.  sein  Verhaltniss  zur  Ren.,  Leipzig,  1866. 

7  Geiger,  bk.  ii,  has  a  ch.  [v]  on  Universities;  vi  is  on  Learned  Socie- 
ties, ix  on  Reuchlin,  x  on  Erasmus,  xi  on  von  Hutten.  Hettner  makes 
Hans  Sachs  the  greatest  humanist  of  them  all.  On  editing  Mss.,  Symonds, 
Despots,  245  sqq.  Machiavelli  was  contemporary  with  Luther.  Reuchlin 
lived  1455-1522,  Erasmus  1467-1536,  Luther  Nov.  10, 1483-Feb.  18, 1546, 
v.  Hutten  1488- 15  23,  Melancthon  1497- 1560. 

§  13     The  New  Ideas 

Draper,  ch.  xx.    Kdhler, '  StaaUlehre  d.  Reformatoren,'  in  Jahrb. 
f.  deutsche  Theol.,  1874. 

The  depth  of  this  great  movement  should  be  appre 
ciated  as  well  as  its  breadth.  Leading  tendencies  which 
marked  it,  slow  and  irregular  in  asserting  themselves, 
may  be  indicated  as  follows  :  I  A  better  thought 1  came 
to  prevail  of  God,  as  not  fickle  or  vindictive  but  rational, 
law-loving  and  benign.  Men's  consciences  became 
freer,  worship  more  spiritual,  religious  devotion  less  a 
slavish  service,  less  a  thing  of  form  and  ceremony. 
2  Life  was  viewed  more  as  something  besides  probation, 
as  having  legitimate  interests  of  its  own.  This  world 
too,  men  felt,  was  meant  to  be  enjoyed.  Man  was  looked 
on  less  as  a  merely  religious  being,  as  simply  an  instru- 
ment for  God's  glory  in  the  old  sense,  and  religion  more 
as  a  personal  instead  of  a  collective  concern.  In  gene^ 
ral,  individualism2  replaced  the  mediaeval  spirit,  so 
dominant  before,  of  ecclesiasticism,  of  class,  guild,  fra- 
ternity. 3  Larger  belief  in  the  prevalence  of  law  and 
order  in  the  universe,  along  with  the  discovered  falsity 


RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION  283 

of  many  old  beliefs,  brought  the  entire  scholastic  method 
of  truth-seeking  into  disrepute,  and  substituted  for  it 
the  more  rational  and  fruitful  one  of  observation,  experi- 
ment, induction.  An  age  of  criticism  came,  wherein 
thought  refused  to  limit  itself  to  formal 3  exercise  or  to 
allow  its  field  to  be  prescribed.  The  content  of  truth, 
revealed  or  other,  had  to  be  examined.  Theology  began 
perforce  to  be  scientific. 

1  Largely  due  to  the  new  study  of  Platonism,  which,  from  the  middle 
of  the  15th  century,  supplanted  that  of  the  Aristotelian  philosophy.  Pico 
of  Mirandola  denounces  A.  as  foe  to  Christianity  and  exalts  Plato  as  its 
saviour.  Pletho  was  main  source  of  this  change.  At  last  in  the  16th 
century  Peter  Ramus  could  begin  a  dissertation  before  the  University  of 
Paris  by  declaring  every  proposition  in  Aristotle  false,  and  Nicolaus  Tau- 
rellus,  counterpole  of  Aquinas,  could  call  Aristotle  and  reason  contradic- 
tory opposites. 

2  Not  at  all  an  accident  that  the  captain  of  the  Reformation,  Luther, 
was  a  Nominalist  instead  of  a  Realist.     Cf.  §  3,  n.  5. 

8  §n,n.  3. 

§  14    Condition  of  the  Church 

Milman,  bk.  xiii.  Symonds,  Despots,  vi-viii;  Catholic  Reaction,  vi,  vii.  Ranke, 
Popes,  bk.  i,  ch.  ii.  Janssen,  vol.  ii.  Creighton,  vol.  i.  Kliipfel,  '  Schw'dbische 
Bund,'  Hist.  Taschenbuch,  1881. 

Amid  such  ideas  and  currents  of  feeling  it  was  im- 
possible that  the  church  should  be  reverenced  and 
valued  as  before.  Various  special  causes  aided  the 
depreciation  of  her,  turning  it  in  many  quarters  into 
contempt  and  hatred.  1  The  great  schism1  of  the 
West,  1 378-141 7,  two  rival  popes,  seven  years  of  the 
time  three,  with  credentials  of  apparently  equal  validity, 
thundering  excommunications  at  each  other.  2  Dissi- 
dence  of  view  during  and  after  the  Councils  of  Pisa, 
1409,  and  Constance,  1414-18,  on  the  question2  whether 


284  RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION 

or  not  pope  was  superior  to  council.  3  The  Inquisi- 
tion,3 organized  by  Innocent  III  and  extensively  used 
against  the  Albigenses,  but  always  unpopular  with  the 
masses,  especially  in  Germany.  4  The  discovery  that 
Aquinas  had  many  wise  misinterpreted4  Aristotle,  also 
the  prevalence  of  Averroistic  views  on  several  important 
questions,  notably  that  of  immortality.5  5  The  chill 
which  zeal  for  the  positive6  element  in  Christianity 
received  from  the  ardent  study  of  the  classics.  6  The 
contrast  of  the  poverty  of  even  the  royal  laity  with  the 
wealth  of  ecclesiastical  institutions  and  the  exorbitant 
demands  on  their  behalf  urged  by  greedy  and  assuming 
churchmen.  7  Most  serious  of  all,  the  moral  corrup- 
tion "  in  ecclesiastical  circles,  especially  in  Italy.  Popes 
practiced  open  concubinage  and  simony,  and  in  govern- 
ing the  church,  purely  in  their  own  interest,  made  free 
use  of  poison  and  the  dagger.  Prelates  who  had  paid 
high  for  places  were  butchered  that  these  might  be  sold 
again.  The  worst  was  under  Alexander  VI 8 :  his  court 
was  a  den  of  fiends,  embracing  an  assassin-in-chief,  a 
professional  poison-mixer,  a  numerous  harem.  The 
moral  gangrene  spread  to  monasteries,  nunneries,  laic 
life.  Bastards  were  too  common  to  bear  stigma,  the 
words  '  honor '  and  '  virtue '  lost  their  old  meanings, 
morality  sunk  to  a  level  lower  than  Epicurean. 

1  Milman,  as  above,  presents  the  causes.  It  was  a  quarrel  between  the 
Italian  and  the  Ultramontane,  mainly  French,  faction  of  the  church. 
Against  Urban  VI,  Italian,  who  was  elected  Ap.  18,  1378,  Clement  VII.  a 
German,  was  elected  on  the  20th  of  the  next  Sept.  Urban  died  Oct.  15, 
1389,  and  Boniface  IX  was  instantly  chosen  in  his  stead.  Clement  VII 
died  Sept.  16,  1394,  Benedict  XIII  being  elected  at  Avignon  the  28th  of 
same  month,  in  his  stead.  Boniface  IV  died  Oct.  I,  1404,  Innocent  VII 
became  his  successor  the  12th.    Innocent  died  Nov.  6,  1406,  succeeded  on 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  285 

Nov.  30th,  same  year,  by  Gregory  XII.  Both  Gregory  XII  and  Benedict 
XIII  lose  obedience  and  are  deposed  by  the  Council  of  Pisa,  June  5,  1409, 
when,  June  26,  Alexander  V  is  elected,  followed,  on  his  death,  by  John 
XXIII,  elected  May  25,  1410.  Gregory  and  Benedict  refusing  to  abdi- 
cate, there  are  now  three  popes,  until  Oddo  Colonna  is  elected  Martin  V 
by  the  Council  of  Constance,  Nov.  II,  1417.  On  all  this,  Creighton,  bk.  i, 
Gibbon,  lxx. 

2  The  catholic  doctrine,  unquestionably  so  since  the  Vatican  Council, 
1870,  is  of  course  that  pope  is  superior.  On  this  account  Pisa  is  not  reck- 
oned as  a  Council  of  the  church,  it  not  having  been  convened  by  a  pope. 

3  Ch.  VII,  §  16.  Cf.  Symonds,  Despots,  333  sqq.,  Weber,  I,  737.  The 
first  agent  of  the  Inquisition  in  Germany  was  put  to  death,  and  several 
others  later. 

4  Roger  Bacon  reproached  Aquinas  and  Albert  the  Great  with  teaching 
Aristotle  as  boys,,  without  knowing  him.  Duns  Scotus  called  Aristotle  as 
taught,  nothing  but  an  '  aristotelizing  Thomas.'  This  conviction  grew,  and 
led  to  the  sundering  of  theology  from  philosophy,  the  latter  henceforth 
only  ancillary.  Modern  criticism  confirms  these  opinions,  proving  that  his 
mediaeval  expositors  ascribed  to  A.  opinions  of  Arabian  glossators  and 
other  Peripatetics,  and  grossly  falsified  him  to  make  him  orthodox.  Miche- 
let,  49,  Lange,  H.  of  Materialism,  bk.  i,  sec.  ii.  Thus  Albert  the  Great, 
Aquinas  and  Duns  Scotus  agree  in  referring  to  Aristotle  a  conception  of 
cause  which  he  never  entertained. 

5  Averroes  had  denied  personal  immortality,  at  least  in  the  usual  sense, 
maintaining  that  only  mind  or  spirit  in  general  would  survive  bodily  death. 
He  believed  this  tenet  Aristotelian. 

6  •  Positive '  as  opposed  to  '  moral ' :  the  positive  behests  of  Christianity 
being  those,  as  observance  of  Sunday  and  of  the  sacraments,  which  natural 
reason  would  never  indicate. 

7  The  saints  of  the  North  found  at  Rome  all  the  commandments  turned 
into  the  one  :    '  Geld  her  ! '  —  Hase.     Boiardo  [a  churchman]  wrote  :  — 

'  'Tis  said  by  some  that  by  and  by  the  good 
Pope  and  his  prelates  will  reform  their  ways. 
I  tell  you  that  a  turnip  has  no  blood, 
Nor  sick  folk  health,  nor  can  you  hope  to  raise 
Syrup  from  vinegar  to  sauce  your  food. 
The  church  will  be  reformed  when  summer  days 
Come  without  gadflies;  when  a  butcher's  store 
Has  neither  bones  nor  dogs  about  the  door." 

See  Symonds,  Appendix  to  vol.  ii  of  Lit.  See  ibid.,  for  Lutheran  senti- 
ments of  Italian  poets  in  Leo  X's  age. 


286  RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION 

8  '  Pope  Alexander  VI  [Borgia]  played  during  his  whole  life  a  game  of 
deception.  Never  did  a  person  so  often  break  his  word  or  pay  less  regard 
to  his  engagements.'  —  Machiavelli,  Prince,  ch.  xviii.  Caesar  often  did  his 
father's  and  his  own  assassin-work.  He  would  go  about  Rome  in  the  night 
with  a  squad  of  ruffians,  and  next  morning  a  half-dozen  bodies  of  murdered 
men  would  attest  their  diligence.  His  device  was  aut  Casar  aut  nihil. 
For  such  as  the  Borgias  did  not  dare  or  care  to  take  off  in  this  way  they 
had  a  white,  pleasant-tasting  powder  to  poison  withal,  killing  gradually. 
The  father  died,  and  the  son  almost,  from  accidentally  drinking  wine 
which  they  had  drugged  with  this  powder  for  use  in  removing  a  cardinal. 
Michelet,  214,  also  chaps,  vi,  vii.  On  Lucrezia  Borgia,  §  7,  n.  3.  Beside 
Gregrovius's  work  apologizing  for  her,  see  an  apology  for  the  whole 
family:  Les prods  des  Borgia,  which  the  Rev.  historique,  Mai-Juin,  1883, 
calls  good  for  nothing.  '  Vertu'  had  come  to  mean  merely  'ability,'  espe- 
cially '  cunning,'  and  '  onore,'  '  repute,'  as  in  the  Prince,  passim.  See 
Symonds,  Despots,  ch.  on  Machiavelli.  There  is  awful  satire  in  the 
Decameron,  First  Day,  Second  Novel,  about  the  Jew  Abraham,  converted 
to  Christianity  through  a  visit  to  Rome.  He  reasoned  that  a  religion  able 
to  live  in  spite  of  such  utter  godlessness  in  its  highest  places  must  be  of 
God.  Cf.  Symonds,  Despots,  424  sqq.,  Grimm,  M.  A.,  ch.  ii.  From 
Michelet,  Int.  [vol.  vii],  citing  Rigaud,  the  13th  century  seems  to  have 
been  in  France  as  bad  as  the  15th. 


§  15     Reformers  before  the  Reformation 

Vllmann,  Reformers  before  the  Reformation.  Gillett,  L.  and  Times  of  Huss,  2  v. 
Jortin,  Erasmus.  Drummond ',  do.  Madden,  Savonarola,  2  v.  Jedart,  Jean 
de  Gerson. 

While  these  disorders  were  for  the  most  part  not 
caused  by  the  Renaissance,  which  they  long  antedated, 
it  called  fresh  attention  to  them,  rendering  more  serious 
an  opposition1  to  the  church,  or  to  its  administration, 
which  had  been  wanting  in  no  age.  This  opposition 
was  partly  practical,  insisting  on  reform  of  morals  with- 
out attacking  the  frame  of  the  church,  and  criticising 
ecclesiastical  powers  only  so  far  as  they  withstood  this, 
and  partly  theoretical,  aimed  at  the  very  constitution  of 


RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION  287 

the  church.  The  theoretical  critics  were  of  very  various 
stripes,  from  pure  independents  to  such  as  merely  wished 
to  subject  the  pope  to  new  guaranties  of  fidelity  to  duty. 
Doctrine  save  as  involved  in  polity  did  not  enter  into 
these  controversies,  even  the  most  licentious  popes 
being  scrupulously  orthodox.2  To  the  first  of  the  above 
classes  belongs  Savonarola  of  Florence,  whose  difficulty 
with  the  church  was  complicated  by  politics,3  and  in  the 
main,  Hus  of  Bohemia,  burned  at  Constance.  To  the 
second:  i  The  Albigenses  and  Waldenses,  objects  of 
crusade  and  Inquisition,4  and  to  counteract  whose  influ- 
ence the  great  preaching  orders,  the  Dominicans  and 
Franciscans,  had  been  organized.  2  Abbot  Joachim  of 
Flora,5  with  his  '  Eternal  Gospel,'  which  proclaimed  in 
essence  a  new,  churchless  dispensation,  of  spiritual  men, 
free  through  the  Holy  Ghost,  even  from  the  law  of 
Christ.  3  John  Wyclif,6  the  first  English  reformer, 
who  declared  the  papacy  to  be  the  poison  of  the  church, 
the  pope,  however  good  personally,  Antichrist  by  virtue 
of  his  claim  to  rule  the  universal  church.  4  A  large 
party  of  devoted  churchmen  strongly  represented  at  the 
Councils  of  Pisa7  and  Constance,  who  opposed  papal 
absolutism  and  wished  to  subject  the  pope  entirely  to 
the  authority  of  general  councils. 

1  It  is  thus  impossible  to  understand  the  Reformation  save  as  offspring 
and  phase  of  the  Renaissance.  See  Geffcken,  in  Church  and  State.  But 
best  is  Rossmann,  Bet7-acktungen  ilber  d.  Zeitalter  d.  Ref.  [has  important 
Beilagen\.  Janssen  in  like  manner  deduces  the  Reformation  from  what 
was  before. 

2  Except  possibly  Leo  X,  who  was  charged  with  averroism  [§  14,  n.  5] 
upon  the  doctrine  of  immortality. 

3  See  auth.  at  §  5.  Also  Grimm,  M.  A.,  ch.  iii,  Michelet,  ch.  v, 
Symonds,  Despots,   ch.  viii,  and   Appendix   A.  to   Machiavelli's   Prince. 


288  RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION 

Savonarola  was  the  inflexible  foe  of  the  Medici's  misrule,  which  he  greatly 
helped  to  end,  and  after  Lorenzo's  death,  Piero's  deposition  and  the  de- 
parture of  Charles  VIII,  he  was  for  a  time  lawgiver  to  the  city.  But  the 
combined  opposition  of  Pope  Alexander  VI,  the  Medici  faction  in  Flor- 
ence and  the  despots  of  other  cities  at  last  overwhelmed  him.  On  Hus, 
Milman,  XIII,  viii,  ix,  Creighton,  bk.  ii,  chaps,  iv,  v. 

4  Ch.  VII,  §  i6,  n.  2;  Milman,  IX,  viii. 

8  Michelet,  Int.,  72;  Renan,  Joachim  de  Flore,  in  Rev.  des  deux 
Mondes,  1866;  Miiller,  Joachim  von  Floris,  in  Herzog-Plitt's  Realencyc. 
Joachim's  evangel  proclaimed  a  new  freedom,  to  be  introduced  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  which  should  set  free  from  the  law  of  Christ,  as  Christ  had 
set  free  from  that  of  Moses.  He  spoke  of  the  Spirit,  the  inner  light,  in 
much  the  manner  of  the  early  modern  Friends.  John  of  Parma  said  to 
the  Cordeliers :  Doctrina  Joachimi  excellit  doctrinam  Christi. 

•  Milman,  XIII,  vi. 

7  On  these  Councils,  Creighton,  I,  vi,  vii,  II.  Ill  is  on  the  Council  of 
Basel. 

§  16    Germany  :    Religious  State 

Janssen,  vols,  i,  ii.     Ullmann,  as  at  §  15.    Hase,  ch.  vi. 

Germany  was  the  land  where  for  special  reasons  this 
spirit  of  ecclesiastical  rebellion  was  strongest.  Real 
piety  and  morality  had  here  their  chief  seat.  The 
Bible  was  common  and  in  the  vernacular,1  preaching 
likewise,  much  of  which  was  evangelical  and  earnest. 
The  work  of  Tauler2  and  of  the  Friends  of  God  had 
taken  lasting  effect.  John  Wessel 3  had  proclaimed  up 
and  down  the  Rhine  valley  nearly  the  same  doctrines 
which  Luther  was  about  to  advocate  with  such  success. 
Von  Wesel  and  von  Goch  had  been  influential  in  the  same 
direction.  Italian  vice  was  near  enough  to  be  known, 
not  familiar  enough  to  be  popular.  The  spirit  and 
beliefs  of  Hus4  had  lived  on,  nourished  by  the  memory 
of  his  holy  life,  of  his  brave  and  unjust  death.  With  all 
this  was  joined  that  Teutonic  individualism 5  and  love  of 


RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION  289 

independence,  which,  partly  good,  partly  evil,  have  made 
Germany  even  to  our  day,  a  theatre  of  political  disorder. 
It  is  noticeable  that  the  sixteenth  century  found  feudal- 
ism powerful  in  Germany  alone.6  Once,  mostly  loyal 
to  the  emperor,  the  Germans  had  abhorred  the  pope  as 
his  foe,  and  this  feeling  still  existed.  Now  princes, 
striving  for  sovereignty 7  of  their  own,  hated  Rome  as 
having  become  the  empire's  natural  mate  and  helper. 
This  animus  infected  the  people  and  large  numbers  of 
the  clergy. 

1  There  were  17  German  translations  of  the  Bible  [not  merely  edi- 
tions] before  Luther's :  14  High  German,  3  Low.  Surgant's  Manuals 
Curatorum,  1506,  warns  preachers  to  distinguish  before  their  hearers  be- 
tween the  sense  and  the  letter  of  scripture,  because  the  people,  women  as 
well  as  men,  have  the  Bible  in  their  own  tongue  and  will  read  the  portions 
for  the  day  before  coming  to  church.  It  is  no  fiction  or  hyperbole  when 
Sebastian  Brant  begins  his  Narrensckiff,  1494  [ed.  Zarncke]  :  — 

'  All  land  syntjetz  voll  heiliger  gschrift, 
Und  was  der  selen  heil  antrifft, 
Bt'bel,  der  heiligen  V'dter  ler, 
Und  ander  der  gleichen  Biicher  mer, 
In  mass  das  ich  ser  wunder  hab 
Das  Nyemant  bessert  sich  darab.' 

The  editor  of  the  Cologne  Bible,  i470-'8o,  presupposing  that  the  learned 
will  still  use  the  Latin  scriptures,  exhorts  that  all  Christians  read  the  new 
translation,  attending  to  the  sense  thereof.  The  Liibeck  Bible,  1494,  con- 
tains the  same  injunction.  Proofs  of  this  kind  exist  in  abundance.  Yet 
Luther  expressly  says :  '  When  I  was  20  years  old  I  had  never  yet  seen  a 
Bible  and  supposed  there  were  no  other  gospels  and  epistles  than  those  in 
the  postils.'  In  explanation  it  has  been  noticed  that  Luther  was  brought 
up  in  a  very  rude  part  of  Germany,  Mansfeld  in  Thiiringen,  even  Leipzig 
being  named  in  1497  a  Barbara  tellus.  But  before  ending  his  20th  year 
he  had  been  a  year  at  Magdeburg  and  taken  his  Bachelor's  degree  at 
Erfurt.  If  it  is  true  that  he  had  then  never  seen  a  Bible  it  must  have 
been  his  own  fault.     See  Janssen,  vol.  ii,  67  sq.,  cf.  vol.  i  [12th  ed.],  54. 

2  John  Tauler,  1 290-1 361,  a  mighty  mystic  perfectionist  and  preacher, 
to  whose  mode  of  viewing  Christianity  Luther  was  greatly  indebted.     He 


29O  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

did  not  defy  or  break  with  the  church,  yet  minimized  its  office.  On  the 
Friends  of  God,  Milman,  vol.  viii,  399.  They  too  were  mystics,  more  ultra 
than  Tauler  was  at  first,  but  under  the  influence  of  their  leader,  Nicholas  of 
Basle,  he  joined  them.  The  Friends  were  still  in  existence  in  Luther's 
day, '  if  not  organized  yet  maintaining  visibly  if  not  publicly  their  succession 
of  apostolic  holiness.' 

8  Hase,  §  264.  Wessel  [d.  1489]  proclaimed  true  religion  independent 
of  church  forms,  forgiveness  by  God  alone,  scripture,  '  God's  abbreviated 
word,'  as  sole  source  of  faith.  Goch  laid  stress  on  saving  faith  as  neces- 
sarily issuing  in  good  works.  Wesel  emphasized  predestination  and  made 
light  of  papal  power.  He  was  imprisoned  [1479]  and  forced  to  recant, 
dying  in  prison,  1481.  Luther  taught  very  little  if  aught  in  which  these 
men  and  their  numerous  fellow-believers  all  over  Germany  had  not  antici- 
pated him.     Wesel  had  been  professor  in  Erfurt,  Luther's  own  alma  mater. 

*  See  §  15,  n.  3.     Hase,  §§  262  sq.  »  Ch.  VI,  §  13. 

6  Ch.  VI,  §  3  and  n.  1.  7  Bryce,  xvii,  xviii. 


§  17    Political  State 

Symonds,  Catholic  Reaction,  ch.  i.  Robertson,  Charles  V,  bks.  i,  ii.  Ranke,  Ref.  in 
Germany,  bk.  i;  Popes,  bk.  i,  ch.  iii.  Geiger,  II,  ii.  yanssen,  vol.  i,  bk.  iv,  vol. 
ii,  esp.  3i3~'i6.  Ullmann,  Kaiser  Maximilian  /.  Mignet,Rivaliti  de  Francois  1 
et  de  Charles  V,  2  v.    Putter,  German  Empire,  bk.  iv. 

Germany  began  the  sixteenth  century  in  extreme 
political  distraction.  Victory  there  of  feudal  aristocracy 
over  central  power,  the  precise  reverse  of  contemporary 
development  in  France,  had  left  the  emperor  the  mere 
head  of  a  loose  confederation,  with  very  slight  actual 
power.  The  Fiirsten,  hereditary  and  practically  sover- 
eign, were  seeking  to  subdue  the  cities  and  all  nobles 
within  their  territories,  holding  of  the  emperor.  So 
great  the  anarchy,  the  Diet1  of  1495  ordained  toward 
the  reform  and  greater  efficiency  of  the  empire  (1)  a 
general  tax  for  its  legitimate  needs,  (2)  universal  and 
perpetual  end  to  wars  between  the  states,  aggrieved 
rulers  to  recur  to  (3)  the  imperial  chamber2  or  supreme 


RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION  29 1 

court  of  the  empire,  never  popular  with  emperors  be- 
cause its  members  were  appointed  by  the  estates.  To 
balance  it  the  aulic  council,  created  in  1501  as  an  Aus- 
trian affair,  gradually  assumed  imperial  functions.  In 
1500  the  empire  was  divided  into  six  administrative 
circles,  made  ten  in  15 12,  a  Fiirst,  with  army,  in  charge 
of  each,  to  insure  the  execution  of  laws.  The  empire's 
foreign  relations  were  still  more  troubled,  commanding 
Maximilian's  and  Charles's  constant  attention,  i  Turk- 
ish wars3  threatened  Austria  chiefly  and  directly  but 
involved  the  whole  empire,  ii  Partly  imperial,  partly 
Austrian  interests  led  Maximilian  into  costly  leagues,4 
(1)  to  drive  Charles  VIII  from  Naples,  1495,  (2)  that  of 
Cambray,  1 508,  to  strip  Venice  of  her  main-land  posses- 
sions, and  (3)  'the  Holy,'  so  called,  151 1,  to  expel  the 
French  from  Milan  and  all  Italy,  iii  Disastrous  to  the 
empire  was  the  enmity  to  the  Hapsburgs  because  of 
their  immense  hereditary  sway : 6  Austria,  Burgundy, 
the  Netherlands,  Spain,  Naples  and  Sicily,  America, 
to  all  which  Ferdinand's  marriage  added  Bohemia  and 
Hungary.  France,  surrounded,  must  have  been  Haps- 
burg's  foe,  even  had  Charles  not  been  elected  emperor 
over  Francis  I,  his  rival. 

1  The  first  Diet  under  Maximilian  I  [1493-1519].  His  predecessor, 
Frederic  III  [1440-93],  had  resisted  these  innovations  as  imperilling  im- 
perial power.  Maximilian,  'the  Penniless,'  yielded,  hoping  to  realize  from 
the  new  tax,  called  the  '  common  penny.' 

2  With  president,  appointed  by  emperor,  and  adsessores,  by  the  diet. 
The  diet  consisted  of  the  electors,  the  other  Fiirsten,  and  the  delegates  of 
the  free  cities.  The  chamber  would  thus  certainly  be  against  the  emperor 
on  any  question  between  him  and  diet  or  Fiirsten.  The  seat  of  the 
chamber  [till  1693:  afterwards  always  Wetzlar]  was  Spires,  and  the  slow- 
ness of  its  proceedings,  unmatched  even  in  England's  chancery,  led  to  the 
proverb  :  Spirae  lites  spirant  et  non  exspirant. 


292 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 


3  After  taking  Constantinople  the  Turks  continued  to  advance  toward 
the  heart  of  Europe  till  1683,  when  they  were  forced  to  retire  from  Vienna. 
At  this  date  Ottoman  power  encompassed  the  entire  Black  Sea. 

*  He  was  allied  in  (1)  with  Venice,  Pope  Alexander  VI,  Milan  and 
Ferdinand  of  Aragon,  his  aim  to  check  French  power;  in  (2)  with  Pope 
Julius  II  [i5C»3-'i3],  Louis  XII  of  France,  who  was  Maximilian's  vassal 
for  the  Milan  duchy,  and  Ferdinand:  motive,  to  punish  Venice  for  alii-" 
ance  with  Turks  and  take  back  the  cities  it  had  wrested  from  Romagna; 
in  (3)  with  Julius,  Venice,  Ferdinand,  Henry  VIII  of  England,  and  the 
Swiss :  motive,  to  carry  out  Julius  IPs  notion  that  '  the  barbarians  must  be 
banished  from  Italy.' 


5  Maximilian                            Mary 

of  Austria,                                  of 

Emperor  1493-1519.                     Burgundy. 

1                                               1 

Ferdinand                    Isabella 

of                                 of 

Aragon.                            Castile. 

I                                       1 

1 
Philip  Fair 
of  Austria. 

1 

1 
Joanna. 

1 

1 

1 

Charles  (I  of  Spain)  V, 

Emperor  1519-' 58. 

Ferdinand  I, 
Emperor  i5s8-'64. 

Charles  V  inherited  the  Austrian  crown  lands  and  the  Netherlands  from 
his  father,  United  Spain,  with  Naples,  Sicily,  and  America  from  his 
maternal  grandfather.  To  the  empire  he  came  of  course  by  election.  Of 
Austria  he  committed  first  the  administration,  then  the  possession,  to  his 
brother  Ferdinand,  who  also  succeeded  him  in  the  empire.  Austria  had 
acquired  this  great  power  by  marriage,  of  Maximilian  I  with  Mary  of  Bur- 
gundy, of  their  son  with  Joanna,  and  of  Ferdinand.     Hence  the  lines :  — 


Bella  gerant  alii,  tufelix  A  ustria  nube, 
Namque  Mars  aliis  dat  tibi  regna  Venus. 


§  18     Spread  of  the  Reformation1 

Janssen,  vol.  iii,  bk.  i.     Weber,  ii,  39  sqq.     Gr'un,  as  in  bibliog.     Ranke, 
Ref.  in  Germany,  bk.  i,  iii. 

Luther  had  at  first  no  thought  of  breaking  with  the 
church  but  was  drawn  to  the  step  gradually,  by  force  of 
circumstances  rather  than  of  set  purpose.     A  year  after 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  293 

arraigning  Tetzel  he  appeals2  to  the  pope,  holds  an 
equally  docile  attitude  in  conference  with  Miltitz  in 
15 19,  reverently  addresses  Leo  again  in  15 19  and  1520, 
seems  not  averse  to  peace  even  at  the  colloquy  of 
Regensburg3  so  late  as  1541.  The  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion disclaimed  all  purpose  of  framing  a  new  church. 
But  his  outcry  against  Tetzel's  shameless4  traffic  had 
voiced  a  popular  feeling  stronger  than  he  thought,  and 
after  his  bold  stand  at  Worms  he  found  himself  at  the 
head  of  a  movement  for  which  times  were  ripe,  bearing 
him  on  in  spite  of  himself.  The  intelligence  and  moral 
earnestness  which  speedily  sided  with  him,  soon  com- 
manded the  people.  Before  the  Reformation  was  half 
a  century  old,  notwithstanding  its  foes  and  its  excesses, 
the  Peasants'  War5  and  the  Miinster  anarchy,  fully 
ninety  per  cent,  of  the  Germans  had  embraced  it. 
Meantime  a  more  radical  revolt  against  Latin  Chris- 
tianity had  been  spreading  in  Switzerland,  led  by 
Zwingli.6  Checked  for  a  time  by  his  death,  this  south- 
ern protestantism  assumed  double  vigor  under  Calvin. 
From  Geneva,  its  centre,  went  forth  zealous  preachers 
in  all  directions,  fearless  of  death,  bent  on  the  salvation 
of  souls.  Besides  French  Switzerland,  Holland  and 
Scotland  were  won  for  Calvinism,  England  and  France 
almost. 

1  1483,  Luther  born. 
1508,  Professor  at  Wittenberg. 

15 1 7,  Theses  against  Tetzel. 

1 5 18,  Zwingli  begins  in  Zurich. 

1520,  June  15,  Luther  excommunicated,  by  the  bull  exsurge  dornine. 

1521,  Diet  of  Worms,  Luther  under  imperial  ban,  to  Wartburg, 

begins  tr.  of  Bible. 
i524-'5,  Peasants'  War. 
1525,  League  of  Dessau,  Catholic  Fursten. 


294  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

1526,  I  Diet  of  Spires,  liberty   but   no   propagandism :    League   of 
Torgau,  Lutheran  Fiirsten. 

1529,  II  Diet  of  Spires,  Edict  of  Worms  to  be  rigorously  executed: 

Lutherans  protest,  hence  '  Protestants.' 

1530,  Diet  of  Augsburg:  Melancthon  presents  Augsburg  Confession, 

without  effect;   new  opinions  to  be  suppressed. 

1531,  League  of  Smalcald,  Protestant  Fiirsten  and  cities. 

1532,  Peace  of  Niirnberg :  Augsburg  decree  r»scinded:   Protestants 

to  have  liberty  till  Council. 
i534-'5,  Anarchy  in  Miinster. 
1536,  Calvin  begins  at  Geneva. 
l545-'63,  Council  of  Trent. 

1546,  Luther  dies,  Feb.  18. 
1 546-' 7,  Smalcaldic  War. 

1547,  Battle  of  MUhlberg :  Wittenberg  taken  by  Charles  V. 

1552,  Maurice    joins    Protestants,    being    already    in    league    with 

Henry  II :  Treaty  of  Passau,  Protestants  free  till  next  Diet. 

1553,  Battle  of  Sievershausen :  Maurice  beats  Albert  of  Brandenburg- 

Culmbach  but  is  mortally  wounded. 
1555,  Peace  of  Augsburg. 

2  Janssen,  vol.  ii,  71  sqq.  Luther  was  at  Rome  in  1 5 10.  Whatever 
his  impressions  then  it  was  long  before  he  thought  of  deserting  the  church. 
March  3,  15 19,  he  protests  to  the  pope  before  God  and  all  creatures  that 
he  has  never  intended  to  attack  the  Roman  church.  In  Feb.,  same  year, 
he  averred  that  no  cause,  no  sort  of  sin  or  evil  therein,  was  or  could  be 
so  important  as  to  justify  one  in  leaving  the  church.  In  the  Leipzig  dis- 
putation of  this  year  he  admitted  that  the  Hussites  had  done  wrong  in 
separating  from  the  church.  In  1520  he  writes:  ' To  Leo  the  Tenth,  the 
all-holiest  in  God  the  Father,  Pope  at  Rome,  all  blessedness  in  Christ 
Jesus,'  stating  that  he  wishes  well  both  to  Leo  and  to  the  Roman  Chair, 
and  prays  for  both  '  with  all  his  powers.'  Yet  he  had  expressed  to  Spala- 
tin,  March  13,  15 19,  his  uncertainty  whether  the  pope  was  Antichrist  or 
Antichrist's  apostle,  and  in  the  letter  of  1520  he  appeals  to  Leo  if  it  is 
'  not  true  that  nothing  exists  under  the  wide  heaven  more  ugly,  poisonous 
or  hateful  than  the  Roman  court.  For  it  far  surpasses  the  vice  of  the 
Turks,  insomuch  that  although  Rome  was  once  a  gate  of  heaven  it  is  now 
a  much  wider  opened  mouth  of  hell,  such  a  mouth,  alas,  through  God's 
wrath,  that  no  one  can  shut  it.'  He  expects  Leo's  thanks  for  this  plain- 
ness of  speech,  and  will  recant  nothing. 


RENAISSANCE    AND    REFORMATION  295 

*  Where  the  emperor  and  Contarini,  papal  legate,  met  Bucer  and 
Melancthon  half-way.  But  the  protestant  FUrsten  enjoyed  freedom  and 
did  not  propose  to  gird  on  again  their  old  bonds  to  church  and  empire. 

4  According  to  Luther,  Tetzel  preached:  I  'That  the  red  cross  on  the 
indulgences,  with  the  pope's  seal,  was  just  as  powerful  as  the  cross  of 
Christ.  2  That  he,  Tetzel,  had  grace  and  power  as  great  as  St.  Peter 
would  have  if  present.  3  That  in  heaven  he  would  not  take  second  place 
to  Peter,  for  he  with  his  indulgences  had  saved  more  souls  than  Peter  by 
preaching.  4  That  just  as  soon  as  a  piece  of  money  put  into  the  chest  for 
a  soul  in  purgatory  touched  and  jingled  on  the  bottom  the  soul  escaped  to 
heaven.  5  That  the  grace  of  indulgence  was  precisely  the  grace  through 
which  man  is  reconciled  to  God.  6  That  it  was  not  necessary  to  have 
penitence  or  pain  or  do  penance  for  the  sin  if  one  purchased  the  indul- 
gence.' From  Tetzel's  explanation  of  indulgences  later,  Janssen  doubts 
his  preaching  thus,  but  Myconius  confirms  Luther. 

t  5  This  rising  of  the  oppressed  and  starving  poor  to  wrest  their  rights 
from  the  nobles  was,  of  course,  only  occasioned  by  Luther's  revolt,  but  his 
enemies  charged  him  with  causing  it.  To  clear  himself  he  became  the 
most  merciless  opponent  of  the  Peasants'  movement.  He  was  also  held 
responsible  for  the  wild  views  and  plans  of  the  Minister  fanatics,  who, 
though  holding  much  valuable  truth,  proposed  to  suppress  not  only  the 
papal  system  but  all  temporal  rule,  setting  up  forthwith  the  kingdom  of 
God  on  earth. 

8  On  Zwingli  and  Calvin,  Janssen,  vol.  iii,  bks.  i,  v;  Freemantle,  Church 
and  Democracy  at  Geneva,  Contemp.  Rev.,  Aug.,  1882;  Coligny  and 
Failure  of  Fr.  Reformation  [in  New  Plut.  Ser.].  Under  Catherine  dei 
Medici  France  was  on  the  point  of  going  over  to  Protestantism,  nobility 
and  merchant  classes  especially.  Margaret  of  Valois,  Francis  I's  sister, 
was  a  Huguenot.     See  Green,  England,  vol.  ii,  337. 


§  19    Political  Intervention  and  Settlement 

Ranke,  Ref.  in  Germany,  bks.  i,  vi.     Janssen,  vol.  iii,  bk.  ii.    Robertson,  Charles  V, 
bks.  ix,  x.     Heeren,  Pol.  Conseqq.  of  the  Reformation. 

Much  as  the  Reformation  owes  to  Luther,  one  of  his- 
tory's greatest  figures  and  forces,  he  was  voice  to  it 
rather  than  cause,  and  by  his  narrowness 1  and  indiscre- 
tion even  did  not  a  little  to  hinder  it.     But  his  breach 


296  RENAISSANCE   AND   REFORMATION 

with  the  humanists  was  a  help,  rendering  the  movement 
popular  at  the  same  time  that  it  had  solid  intellectual 
basis  in  himself  and  Melancthon.  The  half  aristocratic 
character  of  the  Reformation  in  France,  where  it  allied 
itself  with  descendants  of  the  old  feudal  aristocrats,  was 
the  chief  source  of  its  failure  there.  The  Reformation 
found  decisive  support  in  the  political  world,  without 
which  it  must  have  failed  or  been  indefinitely  delayed. 
This  proceeded  from  :  1  All  tendencies  in  the  empire 
hostile  to  either  it  or  the  church.  2  All  princes  or 
nobles  dissatisfied  for  any  reason  with  either.  3  The 
interregnum  before  the  election  of  Charles  V,  which 
made  vicar  Frederic  the  Wise,2  Luther's  firmest  sup- 
porter. 4  Charles's  character  as  a  foreigner, 3  the  same 
consideration  as  to  Ferdinand  causing  his  election  'King 
of  the  Romans,'  to  multiply  the  protestant  princes. 
5  French  and  Turkish4  attacks.  6  Direct  alliance  and 
aid  of  the  French  kings  Francis  I  and  Henry  II,  who, 
while  burning  protestants  at  home,  succored  them  be- 
yond the  Rhine.  Once  at  peace  with  his  foreign  foes, 
Charles,  consummate  captain,5  found  no  difficulty  in 
overrunning  Germany  in  the  Smalcaldic  war,  but  the 
treason 6  of  Maurice  of  Saxony  speedily  restored  victory 
to  the  protestant  side,  and  irrevocably  sundered  church 
as  well  as  empire  into  two  confessions.  By  the  Peace 
of  Augsburg,  1555,  in  spite  of  the  pope's  opposition, 
this  division  took  legal  form.  Princes  and  free  cities 
that  held  the  Augsburg  Confession  were  to  have  equal 
imperial  rights  with  catholic  estates.  No  other  form 
of  protestantism  was  recognized.  The  ius  reformandi" 
might  be  everywhere  exercised  :  cuius  regio,  eius  religio, 
but  dissenters  were  free  to  emigrate. 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  297 

1  He  and  Zwingli  held  a  disputation  at  Marburg  on  the  nature  of  the 
Lord's  supper  [§  20,  n.  1].  Luther  insisted  on  taking  the  words  'this  is 
my  body'  literally,  in  catholic  fashion;  Zwingli  interpreted  them  sym- 
bolically :  '  this  means  my  body.'  Despite  their  disagreement  Zwingli 
held  out  the  hand  of  fellowship.  Luther  refused  it,  saying,  '  Ye  are  of  a 
different  spirit.'  Yet  Bucer  induced  the  Zwinglian  cities  to  join  the  Smal- 
caldic  League.  Janssen  is  not  over-severe  in  accusing  Luther  of  too  easily 
identifying  his  view  with  God's  truth,  though  Luther  often  enough  pro- 
fesses fallibility.  The  humanists,  Erasmus,  Reuchlin,  Albrecht  Durer, 
at  first  encouraged  Luther,  but  could  not  go  the  length  of  rupturing  the 
world's  ecclesiastical  unity.  Not  strange.  They  foresaw  the  '  Caesaro- 
papismtis '  [Ch.  IX,  §  4]  to  which  the  reform  movement  must  lead,  and 
deemed  religion  safer  in  an  ecumenical  church  under  an  elective  head 
than  in  so  many  national  churches  each  under  an  irresponsible  head. 
Men  who  argued  so  Luther  regarded  God's  enemies. 

2  The  pope,  fearing  the  power  Charles  would  have  if  elected,  secretly 
favcred  Francis,  and  did  his  best  to  bring  Frederic  to  his  view  as  likely  to 
hold  the  balance  of  power  among  the  electors.  This  was  Miltitz's  mis- 
sion [§  18],  and  explains  his  kindly  attitude  toward  Luther.  In  M.'s 
conference  with  Luther  he  admits  the  shameless  abuse  of  indulgences, 
which  Janssen  now  seeks  to  cover,  and  promises  that  it  shall  be  stopped. 

8  The  same  has  kept  Hapsburg  rulers  unpopular  in  Germany  ever 
since,  and  cultivated  the  hatred  against  AuStria  as  a  non-German  land 
which  led  to  the  war  of  1866.  See  v.  Treitschke,  Deutsche  Gesch.  im 
XIX  Jahrh.  I,  4  sq. 

*  Yet  the  army  to  beat  back  Solyman  the  Magnificent  in  1531  was 
made  up  partly  of  protestants,  and  Luther  himself  gave  it  a  good  send-off 
in  a  fiery  sermon  against  the  Turks.  Francis  I  formed  alliance  with  Soly- 
man to  aid  against  Charles.  Reviled  therefor,  he  replied,  '  When  wolves 
attack  my  sheep,  I  shall  employ  dogs  to  defend  them.' 

„  6  Equally  consummate  in  the  cabinet,  —  one  of  history's  great  men. 
Nor  was  he  by  any  means  the  catholic  bigot  most  protestants  suppose. 
On  the  contrary  catholics  accused  him  of  favoring  and  even  patronizing 
heretics.  Green,  England,  II,  204  sqq.  Cf.  Weber,  II,  33.  As  they  stood 
above  Luther's  grave  in  Wittenberg  the  duke  of  Alva  was  for  pulling  up 
and  burning  the  corpse.  '  I  war  not  with  the  dead  but  with  the  living,' 
said  the  emperor.  He  attacks  the  League  of  Cognac,  though  headed  by 
Pope  Clement  VII,  Francis,  Venice,  Sforza  of  Milan  and  Henry  VIII  its 
other  members,  and  his  army  under  the  Constable  de*  Bourbon,  who  had 
deserted  Francis  for  Charles,  takes  Rome  and  imprisons  the  pope.     Many 


298  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

protestants  were  in  this  army  also.  Hostilities  were  ended  by  the  Ladies' 
Peace  of  Cambray,  1529  [Charles's  aunt,  Margaret  of  Austria,  and  Fran- 
cis's mother,  Louise  of  Savoy]. 

6  He  had  aided  the  emperor  in  the  campaign  against  the  protestants 
and  in  return  had  been  installed  elector  of  Saxony  in  John  Frederic's 
place.  But  no  sooner  has  Miihlberg  made  Charles  master  of  Germany 
than  Maurice  turns  against  the  emperor,  allies  himself  with  Henry  II  of 
France  and  becomes  head  champion  of  the  protestant  cause. 

7  Freedom  of  faith  after  all  only  for  FUrsten,  and  of  these  for  none  but 
Lutherans.  Every  Furst  could  force  his  subjects  to  conform  to  his  faith 
or  leave  his  land.  Lutherans  were  little  less  hostile  to  Calvinists  [Re- 
formed] than  catholics  were.  A  stone  built  into  a  house  in  Wittenberg 
bears  the  legend  from  Reformation  times : 

'  Gottes  Wort,  Lutheri  Sckrift, 
Des  Papstes  und  Calvini  Gift' 

As  little  did  Calvinists  or  Calvin  himself  concede  to  others  the  freedom  of 
belief  which  all  protestants  demanded  from  the  pope.  The  Genevan 
leader  approved  the  burning  of  Servetus,  as  '  a  pious  and  memorable  ex- 
ample for  all  posterity.'  On  the  indefiniteness  of  the  Augsburg  Treaty 
and  the  consequent  misunderstandings,  leading  to  the  30  Years'  War,  see 
opening  §§  of  next  Chapter. 


§  20    Ecclesiastical  Settlement 

Weber,  II,  52  sqq.    Hagenbach,  H.  of  Doctrine,  IVth  Period.     Schaff, 
and  Gieseler,  as  in  bibliog. 

I  Doctrine.  The  protestants  proposed  to  take  script- 
ure alone  as  authority,  casting  aside  tradition,  patristic 
opinion  and  conciliar  decrees.  The  Lutherans  wished 
to  reject  only  the  scripturally  forbidden,  Calvinists 
everything  which  scripture  does  not  command.  Liv- 
ing faith  was  proclaimed  to  be  the  only  soul-saving  act, 
works  valueless  except  as  springing  from  this.  Both 
wings,  though  Calvinists  with  far  the  more  stress, 
referred  faith  for  origin,  in  Augustine's  manner,  to 
divine  predestination.     As  to  the  nature  of  the  eucha- 


RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION  299 

rist,  the  only  recognized  sacrament  save  baptism,  while 
all  renounced  transubstantiation,1  Luther  taught  consub- 
stantiation,  Zwingli  symbolism,  Calvin  a  spiritual  real 
presence  which  he  regarded  something  more  than  a 
mere  product  of  symbolism.  Worship  of  Mary  and  of 
angels  was  denounced  as  sin.  2  Polity.  The  protes- 
tants  rejected  the  pope's  primacy  and  the  entire  papal 
system  as  such,  including  canon  law  and  clerical  celi- 
bacy. Both  sections  agreed  in  giving  up  apostolic  suc- 
cession and  in  subjecting  the  clergy  like  other  citizens 
to  civil  authority,2  but  while  the  Lutherans  retained  a 
modified  episcopacy  and  linked  the  church  closely  with 
civil  power,  the  Reformed  organized  presbyteries,  which 
were  to  be  autonomous.  3  Worship.  Mass  3  in  Latin 
was  replaced  by  service  in  the  vernacular,  wherein 
preaching  was  prominent,  especially  among  the  Re- 
formed, who  also  retained  fewer  forms  and  less  set 
liturgy.  The  laity  communed  in  both  kinds,  church 
music  came  into  new  favor,  the  Reformed  using  psalms, 
Lutherans  hymns  as  well.  In  general,  the  Lutheran 
liturgy  was  the  more  joyous,  speaking  more  of  God's 
fatherhood  and  love,  the  Reformed  more  solemn,  dwell- 
ing upon  God's  judgeship,  justice  and  wrath.  The  last 
difference  affected  the  entire  spirit  of  the  two  parties, 
their  views  of  life  and  their  moral  walk. 

1  The  view  that  the  bread  and  wine,  after  their  consecration  at  com- 
munion, are  as  to  substance,  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  Redeemer,  although 
retaining  their  former  accidents.  Consubstantiation  differed  from  this 
catholic  view  only  in  supposing  the  old  substance  also  to  remain  with  the 
new. 

2  'The  success  of  the  Reformation,  positively  and  negatively,  turned 
chiefly  upon  the  cooperation  of  three  great  deeds :  rediscovery  of  classical 
antiquity  by  the  humanists,  rehabilitation  of  the  pure  gospel  by  the  re- 


3<X>  RENAISSANCE   AND    REFORMATION 

formers,  and  lastly,  supplanting  the  worldly-spiritual  aristocracy  of  the 
later  middle  age  by  the,  where  possible,  national,  but  at  any  rate  modern, 
state.'  —  Roscher,  Gesch.  d.  Nationalak.  in  Deutschland,  32. 

3  The  Lutherans  set  aside,  in  their  view,  not  the  mass  itself  [Messe] 
but  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass.  Hagenbach,  II,  310.  Here  as  elsewhere 
they  wished  merely  to  get  rid  of  abuses  and  lay  bare  the  old  gospel  and 
polity.  Lutherans  love  to  be  called  '  evangelical,'  not  '  protestant,'  even 
to-day. 


SELECT   BIBLIOGRAPHY   TO   CHAPTER   IX 

GERMANY:  Gindely,  Gesch.  d.  30  jahrigen  Krieges**  [the  ablest:  IV 
ends  the  Bohemian  phase];  H.  of  the  30  Yrs.  W.,**  2  v.  [tr.  from  an 
original  briefer  than  the  preceding].  Gardiner,  30  Yrs.  W.**  [in  Ep.  of 
H.:  best  single  vol.  on  the  subj.];  Prince  Charles  and  the  Spanish  Mar- 
riage, 2  v.  Schiller,  30  Yrs.  W.  [cf.  his  Piccolomini,  Wallensteih's  Tod, 
and  W.'s  Lager].  Raumer,  XVIth  and  XVIIth  Cent.,**  2  v.  Hausser, 
Gesch.  d.  rheinischen  Pfalz,  2  v;  Period  of  the  Ref.,**  II  [see  for  lit.]. 
Droysen,  Bernhard  v.  Weimar,  2  v.;  Gustav  Adolph,**  2  v.  Gfrbrer, 
do.  Garnet, Gust.  Adolphus  [New  Plut.  Ser.].  Harte,  do.,  2  v.  Stevens, 
L.  and  T.  of  do.*  Topelius,  T.  of  do.  Mebold,  30  jdhriger  Krieg,  2  v. 
Villermont,  Ernest  de  Mansfeldt,  2  v.  Utterodt,  Ernest,  Grafzu  Mans- 
feld.  Klopp,  Tilly  im  30  jahr.  Krieg,  2  v.  Smyth,  Lect.  on  Mod.  H., 
I,  xiii.  Hallwich,  IVallenstein's  Ende ;  Gestalten  aus  IV.'s  Lager; 
Thurn.  Ranke,  Gesch.  Wallcnsteins ;  Popes,  bks.  ii  sqq.;  D.  Gesch. 
vom  Religionsfrieden  bis  zum  30  jahrigen  Kr.  [vol.  iv.  in  Werke~\.  Frei- 
tag,  Bilder,  III.  Hurter,  Gesch.  Kaiser  Ferdinands  LL,  4  v.  Janssen, 
Gesch.  d.  deutschen  Volkes,  vols,  iii  sqq.;  Resultate  neuerer  Forschh.  iiber 
30 jahr.  Kr.  \_Tiib.  Qttar-Schr.,  1861].  Putter,  German  empire,  vol.  ii. 
France  :  Ranke,  Civil  W.  and  Monarchy  in  Fr.,  XVI  and  XVII  Cent., 
2  v.  Martin,  France,  vols,  xi-xiii.  Michelet,  do.,  vols,  ix-xii.  Cheruel, 
Fr.  sous  le  ministere  de  Mazarin,  3  v.  Perkins,  Fr.  under  Richelieu  and 
Mazarin,  2  v.  Baird,  Rise  of  the  Huguenots,**  2  v.;  The  Hug.  and 
Henry  of  Navarre,**  2  v.  de  Felice,  H.  des  protestants  de  Fr.  Rob- 
son,  Richelieu.  Haag,  France  firotestante,  9  v.  Masson,  Huguenots. 
Kitchin,  France,  bks.  iii,  iv.  Student's  France,  bk.  vi.  [For  other  wks. 
on  France  in  17th  century,  see  Adams,  Manual,  315  sqq.]  General: 
Heeren,  Pol.  Conseqq.  of  the  Reformation.  Villers,  Essay  on  the  Spirit 
and  Influence  of  the  Reformation.  Symonds,  Catholic  Reaction,  2  v. 
Sterling-  Maxwell,  Don  John  of  Austria.  Motley,  John  of  Barneveld,** 
2  v.;  Dutch  Republic,  3  v.;  United  Netherlands,  4  v.  Zwiedeneck- 
Sudenhorst,  Politik  d.  Venedig  ivahrend  d.  30  jahrigen  Kr.,  vol.  i,  1882. 


CHAPTER   IX 

THE  THIRTY  YEARS'  WAR 


§  i  General  Cause  and  Character 

Gardiner,  ch.  i.     Treitschke,  D.  Gesch.  im  XIX  Jahrh.,  I,  i.     Heeren, 
as  in  bibliog.     Hausser,  ch.  xxx. 

Of  that  unity  in  European  society  so  dear1  to  the 
middle  age  the  Reformation  had  about  destroyed  all 
real  remnant,  ruptured  even  the  form.  But  men  would 
not  give  up  the  idea,  or  the  hope  that  it  might  again  be 
realized.  The  Peace  of  Augsburg  had  established  as 
legal  a  religious  confession  other  than  catholic,  but  its 
so  unsatisfactory  basis  of  agreement,  toleration  to  rulers 
alone,  rendered  it  a  truce  rather  than  a  peace.  In  less 
than  seventy-five  years  the  faith  of  Luther  had  to  enter 
upon  a  fresh  struggle  for  life,  protestant  Europe  against 
catholic,  fiercer  and  longer  than  the  first,  which  for  a 
quarter  of  a  century  threatened  to  subjugate  all  Ger- 
many once  more  to  pope  and  emperor.  Now  again 
appears  even  more  painfully  than  at  the  Reformation, 
German  inaptitude  for  political  organization,  the  deteri- 
oration of  the  imperial  constitution,  the  feebleness  and 
nominal  character  of  imperial  power.  The  diet,2  lack- 
ing a  popular  element,  could  not  feel  or  voice  the  real 
spirit  of  the  nation.  The  people  and  their  instituted 
authorities  were  at  feud,  a  majority  of  them  at  least, 


304  THE   THIRTY   YEARS     WAR 

allied  with  a  minority  of  the  princes  against  a  majority 
of  the  princes  supported  by  the  emperor.  The  consti- 
tution offered  no  means  of  reconciliation. 

1  Which  explains  why  so  many  most  excellent  men,  like  Erasmus  and 
Sir  Thomas  More,  clung  to  the  ancient  church  in  spite  of  their  admission 
that  it  needed  reforming  in  head  and  members.  The  formal  unity  of 
Christendom  seemed  to  them  essential  to  any  real  unity  or  power  among 
Christians.  Their  scruple  is  more  readily  seen  to  be  natural  when  we  re- 
member that  till  the  Peace  of  Westphalia,  1648,  church  and  empire  com- 
prised the  sole  European  system  and  the  only  means  for  enforcing  inter- 
national obligations.     Cf.  Ch.  VIII,  §  19,  n.  1. 

2  The  diet  consisted  of  3  regular  colleges,  i)  the  electors,  ii)  the  other 
FUrsten,  iii)  the  representatives  of  the  free  cities.  For  its  irregular  mem- 
bers and  its  constitution  after  the  Peace  of  Westphalia,  see  §  18.  On  the 
general  subject,  Bryce,  316  and  v.  Schulte,  312.  The  electorates  even  in 
the  free  cities  were  narrow  corporations. 

§  2    The  Augsburg  Settlement 

Kitchin,  bk.  iii.     Gardiner,  ch.  i.     Weber,  II,  77.    Mebold,  ch.  i.     Klopp,  Abschn.  i. 

This  had  been  forced  by  sheer  weariness  of  war  and 
was  nowise  duly  considered.  1  From  the  cuius  regio 
eius  religio  had  followed  exceeding  hardship  to  both 
catholics  and  Lutherans,  still  more  to  Calvinists,  no 
prince  of  the  empire  having  embraced  this  confession 
till  1559,1  then  but  one,  no  others  till  1582.  2  The 
reservatum  ecclesiasticum,  relating  to  archbishops, 
bishops  and  abbots  holding  immediately  of  the  empire, 
that  no  one  of  these  on  becoming  protestant  should 
retain  his  preferment,  church  property  or  subjects,  was 
a  mere  imperial  law2  and  had  never  been  agreed  to  by 
the  Lutherans.  3  While  the  Peace  decreed  the  status 
quo  as  to  the  properties  3  already  secularized  by  protes- 
tant princes,  the  vital  question  whether  secularization 


THE  THIRTY  YEARS  WAR  305 

could  go  forward  thereafter  had  never  been  decided. 
From  the  protestant  insistence  that  they  abandon  the 
lands  secularized  before  the  Treaty  of  Passau,  catholics 
naturally  assumed  the  negative.  Protestant  lords  on 
the  other  hand,  from  their  right  to  fix  their  subjects' 
faith,  argued  that  they  might  dispose  of  all  ecclesiastical 
property  within  their  territories  and  had  acted  upon  this 
conclusion.  Whatever  understanding  was  had  at  Augs- 
burg seems  to  have  been  in  the  direction  of  the  catholic 
view  :  the  wishes  and  interests  of  the  majority  of  the 
people  involved  favored  the  protestant. 

1  The  Count  Palatine  turned  Calvinist  in  1559,  the  Archbishop  of 
Cologne  in  1582,  the  Margrave  of  Brandenburg  and  the  Landgrave  of 
Hessen-Kassel  in  1604.  By  the  letter  of  the  Augsburg  Convention,  dock 
sollen  alle  andere  \_Fursteii\,  so  obgemeldeten  beiden  Religionen  nicht 
anha?igig,  in  dieseni  Frieden  nicht  gemeinet,  sondem  gantzlich  ausge- 
schlossen  sein  [  §  4],  Calvinists  in  these  localities  were  no  better  off  after 
than  before  the  conversion  of  their  Fiirsten.  In  fact,  however,  the  latter 
were  too  powerful  to  be  interfered  with.  Contrary  to  Weber's  implication 
this  Peace  did  not,  like  that  of  Westphalia,  guarantee  toleration  to  subjects 
dissenting  from  their  Fiirst's  faith. 

2  The  entire  Treaty  is  in  form  an  imperial  rescript,  but  the  section  [5] 
containing  this  reservation  is  phrased  differently  from  the  rest,  basing  it 
not  on  the  diet's  vote  but  in  Krafft  hochgedachter  Rom.  Kayserl.  Maj. 
gegebenen  Vollmacht  und  Heimstellung. 

3  Subordinate  properties,  that  is,  monasteries,  nunneries  and  church 
lands  which  ecclesiastics  held  not  from  the  emperor  but  from  some  FUrst. 
The  '  secularization '  in  question  had  meant  in  many  cases  mere  appropria- 
tion by  the  Furst  for  his  own  profit,  in  others,  the  rule  perhaps,  devotion 
to  the  support  of  universities  and  schools. 


306  the  thirty  years'  war 

§  3    The  Difficulty  Aggravated 

Motley,  Dutch  Republic;  United  Netherlands.  Prescott,  Philip  II.  Symonds,  vol.  i. 
Baumgarten,  Vor  d.  Bartholom'dus-Nacht.  While,  M.  of  St.  Bartholomew. 
Ranke,  Popes,  bk.  ii.  Philippson,  Contre-rivolution  religieuse  an  XVI'  Steele. 
Allen,  in  Unitarian  Rev.,  1883.     Michelet,  vol.  ix. 

Meantime  many  developments  increasing  hostility 
between  the  camps,  invited  new  trial  of  strength,  i 
Rise  of  the  Society  of  Jesus,  1540.  Its  principle  abso- 
lute, unquestioning  obedience  to  ecclesiastical  authority, 
its  model  of  Christian  life  Saint  Francis,  its  method  of 
work  control  of  education  and  thinking  in  the  influential 
classes,  this  organization  became  at  once  a  great  power 
in  Christendom.1  Trent,  so  soon,  feels  this,  and  its 
decrees,  summarily  anathematizing  all  protestant  beliefs, 
evince  the  spirit  of  the  new  papal  militia.  2  Reform 
within  the  catholic  church.2  This  largely  from  the 
Jesuits,  spurred  thereto  by  protestantism,  yet  so  de- 
cided, real  and  moral  was  the  betterment  that  many 
good  men  might  deny  to  the  Lutheran  revolt  all  further 
raison  d'etre.  3  The  massacres  of  Vassy,  1562,  and 
St.  Bartholomew,  1572.3  In  the  latter,  inhuman  beyond 
conception,  yet  approved  by  the  pope,  at  least  twenty- 
five  thousand  French  protestants,  by  some  estimates 
not  less  than  one  hundred  thousand,  were  butchered  for 
their  faith.  Nothing  could  have  smitten  harder  than 
this  terrible  deed  upon  the  wedge  that  was  forcing 
Christendom  in  two.  4  Persecution  of  protestants  in 
the  Netherlands  by  Spanish  kings,4  15  68- 1609.  The 
policy  of  Charles  V  to  make  his  Lowland  provinces 
catholic  and  separate  them  from  the  empire,  pursued 
with  less  skill  by  his  successors,  led  to  persistent  rebel- 
lion, which  all  the  craft,  force  and  hellish  cruelties  of 


THE    THIRTY    YEARS     WAR  307 

the  Philips  and  their  agents  could  not  quell.  Impos- 
sible that  the  cost  in  blood  and  torture,  of  protestant 
victories  in  this  struggle  should  ever  have  been  for- 
gotten. 

1  By  1 61 8  there  were  even  in  Germany  no  less  than  13,000  Jesuits. 
At  the  opening  of  the  Council  at  Trent  many  catholic  theologians  showed 
a  conciliatory  temper,  but  were  speedily  silenced  by  the  uncompromising 
ardor  of  the  Jesuits. 

2  Philippson,  as  above,  points  out  how,  in  the  16th  century,  Rome  suc- 
ceeded in  not  only  opposing  a  solid  dike  to  the  waves  of  protestantism  but 
in  actually  beating  them  back  and  recovering  a  large  part  of  the  inundated 
land,  especially  in  southern  and  western  Germany.  He  handles  i)  the 
rise  of  the  Jesuits,  ii)  the  reestablishment  of  the  Roman  Inquisition,  and 
iii)  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  Roman  church  owes  a  great  debt  to  the 
protestant  revolt  for  its  own  continued  life  and  power. 

8  Masson,  Huguenots,  49.  Duke  Francois  de  Guise  was  proceeding 
from  Joinville  to  Paris  with  a  company  of  retainers.  As  he  passed  through 
Vassy  on  Sunday,  March  1,  some  Huguenots  were  assembled  in  a  barn  for 
worship.  His  followers  commenced  jeering,  there  was  a  tumult,  the  duke 
was  wounded,  his  soldiers  rushed  upon  the  congregation  sword  in  hand 
and  cut  down  above  60  of  them,  wounding  over  200  others.  On  St.  Bar- 
tholomew, Baumgarten  is  the  very  best.  He  critically  expounds  the  ante- 
cedent history.  Cf.  Hausser,  ch.  xxvii,  Besant's  Coligny,  Michelet's  France, 
IX,  xxi-xxvi,  Baird's  Rise  of  the  Huguenots,  2  v,  and  Smiles's  Huguenots. 

*  Prescott  and  Motley  narrate  these  in  extenso.  Cf.  Hausser,  chaps. 
xxii  sqq.  and  Sterling-Maxwell's  Don  John.  Egmont,  Wm.  the  Silent, 
Maurice  of  Orange,  and  John  of  Barneveld  were  the  great  history-makers 
in  this  protracted  struggle.  It  is  said  that  in  Netherlands  alone  during 
the  18  years  of  Torquemada's  administration  10,220  persons  were  burned, 
197,327  buried  alive,  drowned,  imprisoned  for  life  or  reduced  to  beggary. 
Charles  V  on  relinquishing  his  power,  1556,  gives  Spain  and  its  colonies, 
also  Franche-Comte,  Naples,  Milan  and  the  17  Netherland  provinces  to 
his  son  Philip  II  [i556-'98],  these  last  thus  though  still  de  inre  in  the 
empire,  made  the  dependencies  of  Spain.  This  relation,  not  religious 
difference,  began  the  war.  Open  feud  first  rose  over  i)  presence  of  Span- 
ish troops,  and  ii)  power  bestowed  upon  Philip's  favorite,  Granvella,  arch- 
bishop of  Mechelin,  cardinal  and  primate  over  the  whole  church  of  the 
Netherlands.      Protestantism  meantime  growing  rapidly,  here  Calvinistic 


308  THE   THIRTY   YEARS*    WAR 

more  than  Lutheran,  connected  itself  with  the  opposition  to  Granvella  and 
the  Spaniards,  and  before  the  recall  of  cardinal  and  troops  had  gathered 
fatal  momentum.  Concessions  now  were  worse  than  futile.  In  1567 
Philip  resorts  to  force,  using:  i  The  Duke  of  Alva,  till  1573:  bloody  and 
absolute  rule,  Wm.  the  Silent  and  over  100,000  of  his  fellow-subjects  emi- 
grate, Egmont  and  Hoorn  die  as  traitors,  crushing  and  lawless  taxation 
ruins  business,  driving  the  Dutch  to  sea  as  pirates,  origin  of  their  naval 
and  commercial  greatness,  ii  Requesens,  till  1576:  milder  measures  but 
with  the  same  aim,  to  subjugate  politically  and  religiously,  iii  Don  John 
of  Austria  [victor  at  Lepanto  in  1571],  till  1578:  mutiny  of  Spanish  sol- 
diers and  their  terrible  ravages  in  Flanders  and  Brabant  evoke  the  '  pacifi- 
cation of  Ghent,'  1576,  all  the  provinces  agreeing  to  lay  aside  religious 
differences  and  unite  to  drive  out  the  Spaniards,  iv  Alexander  Farnese 
[of  Parma,  Philip's  greatest  general],  till  1589:  Union  of  Utrecht  [1579], 
consisting  of  the  7  northern,  mainly  German  and  protestant,  provinces: 
Holland,  Zealand,  Utrecht,  Guelders,  Groningen,  Friesland  and  Overyssel, 
declaring  independence  of  Spain,  1581,  under  Wm.  the  Silent  as  Stadt- 
holder.  These  provinces  [Holland],  aided  by  England  [Sir  Philip  Sidney] 
and  Philip  II's  war  with  that  power  [the  Armada],  also  by  Henry  IV  of 
France,  maintained  their  independence  until  the  Peace  of  Westphalia 
decreed  it  in  1648  and  Spain  at  last  recognized  it  in  1657.  Philip's  ac- 
quisition of  Portugal  in  1581  enabled  the  Dutch  to  attack  him  in  the  Por- 
tuguese Indies,  enterprise  which  carried  Dutch  commerce  round  the  globe : 
Dutch  E.  India  Co.  founded  1602,  Java  161 1,  Batavia  1619.  The  southern 
provinces  [Belgium]  were  fully  subjugated,  remained  Spanish  till  the 
Peace  of  Utrecht,  1713,  and  then  passed,  the  portions  ceded  to  France  by 
the  Treaty  of  Aix-la-Chapelle,  1668,  with  the  rest,  to  Austria,  which  re- 
tained them  till  the  French  Revolution.  Schiller,  Abfall  d.  Verein.  Nieder- 
lande. 

§  4    III  Success  of  Protestantism 

Rankc,  Popes,  bk.  vii.     Gardiner,  ch.  i.    H'dusser,  ch.  xxx. 
Lodge,  Mod.  Europe,  ch.  x. 

The  Peace  of  Augsburg  was  followed  by  an  unprece- 
dentedly  disgraceful  period  of  German  history.  The 
anti-catholic  party,  far  from  showing  aught  of  construc- 
tive genius  or  wish,  seemed  at  first  hopelessly  anarchic. 
1    Politically.     Protestants  were  not  united,  petty  gov- 


THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR  309 

ernments  being  mad  with  rivalry,  each  bent  on  self- 
aggrandizement  no  less  than  of  old.  Only  external 
pressure  or  stimulus,  and  this  but  rarely,  could  force 
the  champions  of  the  new  faith  to  present  a  solid  front 
to  foes.  The  Hanseatic  cities1  feared  neighboring 
lords  and  looked  to  the  emperor  for  protection,  as  they 
did  for  intervention  in  favor  of  foreign  trade.  Spirit 
and  energy  were  wanting.  Gustavus  Adolphus  was 
the  only  protestant  chief  who  betrayed  any  sense  of 
having  a  cause.  2  Doctrinally.  Sects  sprung  up  in 
such  multitude  and  fought  so  bitterly  that  it  was  hard 
not  to  condemn  the  primary  schism  whence  all  came, 
and  natural  to  sigh  for  a  central  doctrinal  authority. 
Subscribers  and  non-subscribers  to  the  Formula  of  Con- 
cord 2  gnashed  teeth  at  each  other ;  both  at  Calvinists, 
Calvinists  at  both.  Melancthon  longed  to  die  to  escape 
the  implacable  quarrels  of  theologians.3  3  Ecclesias- 
tically. The  two  reforming  communions  did  not  carry 
out  or  even  understand  the  precious  and  far-reaching 
principle  which  they  had  professedly  espoused,  denying 
one  another  the  very  liberty  of  conscience  which  they 
had  deserted  Rome  for  refusing  them.  Like  intoler- 
ance swayed  the  subdivisions  of  each.  Also  that  author- 
ity in  matters  of  faith  which  the  pope  had  been  cursed 
for  arrogating,  they  yielded  to  secular  rulers,4  ignorant 
and  often  godless.  From  these  three  sources  of  con- 
fusion resulted  a  state  of  affairs  so  hopeless  and  threat- 
ening that  many  protestants  were  aghast,  while  emperor 
and  pope  may  actually  have  felt  it  at  once  obligatory 
and  possible  to  reassert  the  church's  ancient  sway. 

1  Those  belonging  to  the   Hanseatic   League,  a  federation  of  certain 
commercial  and  maritime  cities  between  the  Elbe  and  the  Baltic,  dating 


3IO  THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR 

from  about  1260.  Liibeck  was  its  capital,  Hamburg  always  a  prominent 
member.  From  1350  over  90  cities  belonged  to  the  League,  between 
Esthonia  and  the  Scheld-mouth,  its  field  all  northern  Europe,  its  purposes 
mutual  defence,  security  of  the  routes  of  commerce  whether  by  land  or 
water,  winning  and  keeping  privileges  to  trade,  and  the  dispatch  of  all 
those  matters  now  pertaining  to  private  international  law. 

2  Between  the  strict  Lutherans  and  the  Philipists  or  followers  of  [Philip] 
Melancthon,  these  being  charged  with  leaning  toward  Calvin,  although 
Melancthon's  peculiar  views,  modifying  the  predestination  doctrine  and 
depreciating  the  Old  Testament,  were  in  the  opposite  direction.  The 
Formula  was  subscribed  in  1580  by  96  Lutheran  lords,  but  not  by  all  of 
either  party,  thus  making  three  sects  of  Lutherans  instead  of  two. 

8  Frederic  V's  woes  in  Bohemia  and  desertion  by  the  other  protestant 
electors  he  owed  largely  to  his  Calvinism.  It  was  stiff  indeed.  Even  after 
Gustavus  had  won  back  the  Palatinate,  Frederic  would  not  give  free- 
dom of  worship  to  Lutherans  there.  And  the  Lutherans !  Hohenegg, 
theologian  to  the  Saxon  court,  said :  '  For  it  is  as  plain  as  that  the  sun 
shines  at  noon  that  Calvinism  reeks  with  frightful  blasphemy,  error  and 
mischief  and  is  diametrically  opposed  to  God's  holy  revealed  word.  To 
take  up  arms  for  the  Calvinists  is  nothing  else  than  to  serve  under  the 
originator  of  Calvinism,  the  devil.  We  ought  to  give  our  lives  for  our 
brethren,  but  the  Calvinists  are  not  our  brethren.  We  ought  to  love  our 
enemies:  the  "Calvinists  are  not  our  enemies  but  God's,'  [Hausser].  Chan- 
cellor Crell  for  attempting  to  introduce  Calvinism  into  Saxony  was  impris- 
oned ten  years  and  then  beheaded  on  charge  of  high  treason.  '  It  was 
owing  to  this  spirit  that  the  struggling  protestants  of  France  were  denied 
the  indispensable  support  of  the  most  powerful  sect  of  their  brethren  in 
Germany,  and  that  Lutheranism  and  Calvinism,  reluctant  to  act  together 
even  in  the  most  deadly  crisis  of  the  30  Years'  War,  were  nearly  crushed 
one  after  the  other  under  the  iron  heel  of  Austria'  [Tuttle]. 

4  There  had  never  been  a  formal  establishment  of  religion  in  Christen- 
dom before.  Practically  there  had  been,  particularly  when  the  empire  was 
young  and  strong,  yet  it  had  rested  hitherto  rather  upon  general  consent 
than  upon  express  provision  of  law.  Heeren,  Pol.  Conscqq.,  61  sqq. 
Catholics  bitterly  reproached  protestants  with  having  splintered  the  church, 
giving  it  some  hundreds  of  heads  for  one,  all  of  them  secular  instead  of 
spiritual.     Janssen,  vol.  ii,  85. 


the  thirty  years   war  311 

§  5     Special  Motives  for  Intervention 

Same  auth.  as  at  §  4.    Janssen,  vol.  iii.     Weber,  II,  187. 

Several  considerations  in  addition  to  all  the  above 
inclined  the  emperor  to  interfere.  Most  of  the  constant 
political  tumult,  revolt,  defiance  of  law  and  order1  since 
the  Reformation  opened  had  either  grown  visibly  out 
of  protestantism  or  connected  itself  therewith.  The 
schism  was  the  triumph  of  the  feudal  and  divisive  spirit, 
death  to  imperial  or  any  central  authority,  and  had 
brought  persecution  to  numberless  faithful  sons  of  the 
ancient  church.  In  particular :  1  Some  two  hundred 
monasteries  had  been  seized  since  the  Peace  of  Augs- 
burg, as  to  four  of  which  legal  decision  had  been 
rendered  against  protestant  possession.  The  emperor 
construed  this  decision  as  a  principle  covering  all  such 
cases,  and  so  acted  wherever  he  had  power.  Thus 
when,  in  1582,  the  Elector-Archbishop  of  Cologne,2 
Duke  of  Westphalia,  became  a  Calvinist,  Spanish  troops 
drove  him  from  his  lands,  which  with  his  see  and 
dignity  passed  to  a  catholic.  2  Eight  great  northern 
bishoprics  had  been  brought  under  protestant  rule  by 
what  was  alleged  3  to  be  an  evasive  interpretation  of  the 
reservatum  ecclesiasticum,  to  the  effect  that,  if  the 
chapter  concurred,  though  not  otherwise,  a  bishop,  on 
changing  confession,  might  retain  his  place  and  property. 
Protestants,  long  a  majority  of  the  population,  bade  fair 
to  secure  a  majority  in  the  diet  as  well.  The  last  two 
points  formed  the  real  occasion  of  the  Thirty  Years' 
War,  the  catholics  standing  on,  or  nearest,  the  techni- 
cal right  of  the  case,  the  protestants  on  the  logic  of 


312  THE   THIRTY   YEARS     WAR 

events  and  the  desires  of  the  people.  The  catholic  pro- 
gramme could  have  been  carried  through  only  by  forci- 
bly re-converting  hosts  of  protestants. 

1  Such  as  the  Peasants'  War  and  the  anarchy  at  Miinster. 

2  This  case,  concerning  as  it  did  an  entire  Furstenthum,  was  not  a 
parallel  to  cases  of  mere  monasteries  and  nunneries,  but  it  was  analogous, 
as  that  of  a  Fiirst  proceeding  to  protestantize  communities  and  church 
properties  catholic  at  the  Peace  of  Augsburg.  Nor  was  it  parallel  to  the 
instances  cited  under  2,  since  the  archbishop  had  acted  against  the  oppo- 
sition of  his  chapter.  The  new  incumbent  was  a  brother  to  Maximilian 
of  Bavaria. 

8  Not  justly.  The  language  of  the  reservatum  [§  5,  Tr.  of  Augsburg] 
clearly  presupposes  that  in  the  instances  to  which  it  relates  the  chapters 
remain  catholic,  commanding  these  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  new 
•  archbishop,  bishop,  prelate  or  other  officer  of  spiritual  estate,'  as  the 
case  might  be. 

§  6    Union  and  League 

Gardiner,  ch.  i,  sec.  4.    H'dusser,  ch.  xxxi.     Weber,  II,  188.    Ritter,  Gesck.  d. 
deutschen  Union.     Villermont,  ch.  iv. 

A  most  vexatious  case  of  catholic  aggression,  under 
pretence,  perhaps  according  to  the  letter,  of  law,  was 
that  of  Donauworth.  This  Lutheran  imperial  city, 
whence  all  catholics  save  members  of  a  certain  monas- 
tery had  been  excluded  under  the  cuius  regio,  was  put 
to  the  ban  of  the  empire  in  1607,  for  disturbance  to  an 
illegal  procession  by  the  monks.  Duke  Maximilian  of 
Bavaria,  appointed  to  execute  the  sentence,  on  the 
ground  that  these  had  been  seized  since  Passau,1  restored 
their  churches  to  the  catholics,  quartered  soldiers  on 
inhabitants  persisting  in  Lutheranism,  and  joined  the 
city  to  his  duchy.  In  consequence  of  this  high-handed 
procedure2  and  of  Archduke  Ferdinand's  cruelty  to  prot- 
estants in  Styria,3  a  '  Union  ' i  of  protestant  princes  and 


THE  THIRTY  YEARS  WAR  313 

cities  was  formed  in  1608,  Frederic  IV  of  the  Palatinate 
its  head,  to  prevent  further  infringements  of  the  Augs- 
burg constitution.  The  Union  did  not  mention  defence 
of  faith  as  among  its  objects.  Next  year  the  catholic 
princes,  mostly  ecclesiastics,5  created  their  '  League,' 
headed  by  Maximilian,  a  Wittelsbacher6  like  Frederic, 
to  maintain  imperial  laws  and  to  protect  the  catholic  relig- 
ion. The  Union  expected  aid  from  France,7  the 
League  from  Spain.  The  League  was  united,  ably 
led,  fired  with  ecclesiastical  zeal.  Maximilian  indeed 
had  political  aims  and  a  political  mind,  but  he  too  had 
been  educated 8  and  inspired  by  the  Jesuits.  Mark  that 
League,  not  empire,  is  now  the  church's  champion. 
Probably  the  League  even  so  early  meditated  the  status 
quo  of  1555.  The  Union  on  the  contrary  was  divided 
and  without  enthusiasm,  Calvinists  and  Lutherans  lack- 
ing mutual  confidence,  the  northern  Lutherans,  headed 
by  John  George  9  of  Saxony,  who  envied  Frederic,  hold- 
ing aloof  altogether  and  urging  compromise.  It  was 
further  against  the  Union,  that  Christian  of  Anhalt  at 
least  had  designs  against  the  integrity  of  the  empire, 
and  that  the  contention  of  several  protestants  in  the 
Diet  of  1608  against  the  right  of  the  majority  to  bind  in 
cases  of  taxation  or  religion,  threatened  anarchy,  and 
was  construed  as  masking  a  plan  for  wholesale  attacks 
on  the  church. 

1  See  §  2,  also  §  5,  n.  3. 

2  Understood  to  be  against  emperor  Rudolph's  will.  Even  this  severe 
ruler  was  charged,  like  his  father,  emperor  Maximilian  II,  with  too  great 
tenderness  toward  protestants. 

8  Soon  to  become  emperor  Ferdinand  II.  He  was  a  grandson  of 
emperor  Ferdinand  I.     Naturally  superstitious,  and  educated  by  Jesuits 


314  THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR 

at  Graz  and  at  the  Ingolstadt  [now  Munich]  University,  he  felt  toward 
protestants  and  all  heretics  exactly  as  his  kinsman,  Philip  II  of  Spain,  had 
felt.  He  preferred,  he  said,  to  beg  or  even  be  cut  in  pieces  rather  than 
submit  to  them.  'Do  not  I  hate  them,  O  Lord,  that  hate  Thee?'  he  loved 
to  repeat,  'and  am  not  I  grieved  with  those  that  rise  up  against  Thee?  I 
hate  them  with  perfect  hatred.'  It  was  most  true.  He  had  taken  a  sol- 
emn vow  to  drive,  at  the  risk  of  his  life,  all  sects  and  errors  from  the  lands 
he  inherited.  He  daily  spent  from  two  to  three  hours  in  prayer  and  pious 
meditation.  After  a  long  morning  prayer  he  would  listen  to  two  masses, 
attend  divine  service  in  the  afternoon,  devote  a  set  time  to  the  examination 
of  his  conscience,  and  close  with  an  evening  prayer.  On  a  Sunday  or  a 
feast  day  he  always  heard  two  sermons.  His  sole  literary  activity  con- 
sisted in  the  perusal  of  pious  books.  Gindely,  ch.  i.  The  great  Kepler, 
hitherto  resident  in  Graz,  was  among  the  protestants  exiled  by  Ferdinand's 
fiery  bigotry. 

4  Besides  Frederic,  Christian  of  Anhalt  and  the  Landgrave  of  Hessen- 
Kassel  were  the  Calvinist  leaders.  Wiirttemberg,  Bade-Durlach  and  Neu- 
burg  were  the  chief  Lutheran  states.  Fifteen  imperial  cities  were  mem- 
.bers,  of  which  Strassburg,  Ulm  and  Nurnberg  were  the  foremost. 

6  The  three  ecclesiastical  electors  of  Mainz,  Trier  and  Koln,  and  the 
bishops  of  Wurzburg,  Salzburg,  Regensburg,  Augsburg  and  Passau. 

6  On  the  famous  House  of  Wittelsbach,  Ch.  V,  §  8,  n.  5,  Weber,  I,  699, 
709. 

7  Henry  IV  of  France,  for  some  time  before  his  assassination  on  May 
14,  1610,  had  been  meditating  a  more  or  less  formal  European  system, 
which,  had  his  thought  been  carried  out,  would  have  prevented  the  30 
Years'  War.  The  three  religious  confessions  as  well  as  the  different  forms 
of  secular  polity,  the  empire,  royalties  hereditary,  royalties  elective,  and 
republics,  were  all  to  be  equally  legitimate,  trade  and  navigation  to  be 
free,  no  two  emperors  ever  to  be  elected  in  succession  from  the  same 
house,  the  hereditary  possessions  of  Austria  to  be  circumscribed,  and  any 
trespass  by  one  nation  upon  another  to  be  redressed  by  the  might  of  all. 
This  seems  to  have  been  the  first  emergence  of  the  policy  removing  the 
political  surveillance  of  Christendom  from  church  and  empire,  of  the 
notion  of  a  European  concert  such  as  has  attended  to  the  weightiest 
matters  of  international  interest  since.  The  conception  influenced  Riche- 
lieu's policy  and  the  immortal  work  of  Grotius,  and  got  itself  to  a  great  ex- 
tent realized  in  the  Treaty  of  Westphalia  [§  17].  See  Hausser,  ch.  xxix, 
and  Gindely 's  Rudolph  II,  ch.  Hi. 


THE  THIRTY  YEARS  WAR  315 

8  At  Ingolstadt,  with  archduke  Ferdinand  [n.  3].  On  the  character 
of  these  two  men,  Gindely,  chaps,  i,  iv,  v. 

9  This  was  John  George  I,  161 1— '56,  nephew  of  Maurice  [Ch.  VIII, 
§  19].  Saxony  had  also  the  electors  John  George  II,  i65o-'8o,  III,  1680- 
'91,  and  IV,  1691-94.  All  of  them  sympathized  too  much  with  Austria. 
Weber,  II,  76. 

§  7    Contest  for  Julich-Cleve 

Ranke,  Popes,  bk.  vii,  ch.  i.     Weber,  II,  188.     Tuttle,  H.  of  Prussia,  ch.  iy. 
Gardiner,  21  sq.    Motley,  Barneveld,  chaps,  i,  v,  vi. 

In  1609,  the  male  line  of  the  yulich-Cleve  ducal  house 
becoming  extinct,1  its  immense  territories  were  claimed 
by  both  the  Elector  of  Brandenburg  and  the  Count 
Palatine  of  Neuburg,  representing  the  nearest  female 
heirs.  As  the  laws  of  the  house  forbade  its  lands  to 
be  divided,  Brandenburg  and  Neuburg,  the  estates  of 
the  lands  concurring,  had  agreed2  to  possess  in  com- 
mon, but  Emperor  Rudolph  II,  supported  by  the 
League  and  by  Spain,3  declared  the  fief  escheated 
and  sent  Archduke  Leopold  to  seize  it  by  the  aid  of 
Spanish  troops.  France,  now  under  Henry  IV  firmly 
allied  with  the  Union,4  also  England  and  Holland,  dis- 
patched troops  to  oppose,  retaking  the  fortress  of  Julich. 
The  ensuing  truce  between  League  and  Union  was 
ruptured  by  the  Count  Palatine's  quarrel5  with  the 
Elector,  the  former  joining  the  catholics  and  the 
League,  the  latter  the  Calvinists  and  the  Union.  The 
resulting  war,  wherein  Spain  again  supports  the  League, 
the  United  Netherlands  the  Union,  continues  till  the 
Treaty  of  Xanten,6  1614.  Final  division  was  indeed 
only  arrived  at  in  1666,  when  Brandenburg,  and  so 
Prussia,  receiving  Cleve,  Mark  and  Ravensberg,7  first 
set  firm  foot  in  Western  Germany. 


3l6  THE   THIRTY    YEARS*   WAR 

1  Duke  William,  I539~'92,  had  two  daughters,  Mary  Eleanor  and 
Anna,  and  a  son  John  William.  He  left  a  will  that  should  John  William 
die  childless,  as  he  did  in  1609,  the  duchy  should  go  to  Mary  Eleanor's 
heirs,  or  if  she  had  none,  to  Anna's.  Mary  Eleanor  had  no  sons  but  her 
daughter  had  married  John  Sigismund,  elector  of  Brandenburg.  Anna 
married  Philip  Ludwig,  count  palatine  of  Neuburg,  and  had  a  son,  Wolf- 
gang William.  The  letter  of  the  will  favored  Brandenburg,  the  usual 
preference  in  law  and  usage  of  male  heirs  favored  Neuburg. 

2  By  the  convention  of  Dortmund,  1609.  The  estates  of  any  Fiirsten- 
thum  were  the  prelates,  knights  and  cities,    v.  Schulte,  253. 

8  In  the  year  1609  Spain  effected  a  truce  with  the  Netherlands  for  12 
years,  and  was  hence  at  liberty  to  turn  her  arms  in  other  directions. 

4  France  sent  troops  to  the  Union's  aid  even  after  Henry  IV's  death 
in  the  year  1610. 

6  It  had  been  partly  arranged  that  the  young  count,  Wolfgang  Wil- 
liam, should  marry  his  cousin,  elector  John  Sigismund's  daughter,  but 
count  and  elector  fell  out,  the  latter  striking  the  former  smartly  on  the 
cheek. 

6  This  might  have  been  definitive  but  for  the  immediate  outbreak  of  the 
30  Years*  War,  ripping  up  this  and  all  such  engagements  and  offering 
each  side  the  hope  of  gaining  all.  Another  temporary  bargain  was  patched 
up  at  Diisseldorf  in  1629.  This  matter  even  the  great  date  of  1648  failed 
to  see  settled.     Cleve  was  a  duchy,  Mark  and  Ravensberg  both  counties. 

7  Jiilich  and  Berg  with  the  city  of  Diisseldorf  were  confirmed  to  Neu- 
burg. Neuburg  proper  was  a  small  territory  between  Regensburg  and 
Niirnberg  in  what  is  now  northern  Bavaria. 

§  8     Bohemia's  Royal  Charter 

Gardiner,  ch.  ii.     Gindely,  Rudolph  II;  30  Yrs.  W.,  I,  iii;   Gesch. 
d.  Bomisch.  Majest'dtsbriefes. 

Meantime  affairs  at  the  other  extremity  of  the  empire 
assumed  a  threatening  aspect.  Through  the  policy, 
most  liberal,  of  the  enlightened  Emperor  Maximilian 
II,1  the  hereditary  Hapsburg  territories,2  of  Austria, 
Styria,  Carinthia  and  Carniola,  had  become  very  strong- 
holds of  protestantism.  In  all  these  lands  the  burghers 
and  nobles  had  espoused   the  Reformation  almost  en 


THE    THIRTY    YEARS     WAR  317 

masse?  Tyrol  alone  clung  to  the  old  faith.  In  Hun- 
gary and  the  realms  of  the  Bohemian  crown,  where 
Hapsburg  archdukes  had  ruled  as  kings,4  a  majority 
of  the  people  and  almost  all  the  nobles  had  also,  partly 
from  memory  of  Hus,  renounced  Catholicism.  Emperor 
Rudolph  II,  king  of  Bohemia,  less  tolerant  than  his 
father,  had  yet  been  forced  in  order  to  retain  the  loyalty 
of  his  Bohemian  subjects,  to  grant  a  charter  in  1609 
assuring  to  every  person  free  choice  between  the  cath- 
olic and  the  Bohemian-protestant  confession.5  The 
right  to  build  churches6  was  hereby  bestowed  not 
universally  but  only  on  some  fourteen  hundred  nobles 
and  forty-two  towns.  On  the  royal  domains  alone  was 
this  right  conferred  upon  the  people  themselves.  The 
question  whether  in  this  matter  ecclesiastical  should  be 
treated  as  royal  domains  was  not  decided.7  The  pro- 
testants  of  Braunau  built  a  church  on  the  land  of  the 
Abbot  of  Braunau,  those  of  Klostergrab  on  the  land 
of  the  Archbishop  of  Prag.  Mathias,  having  become 
king,  in  161 1  declared  this  illegal.  Perhaps  legiti- 
mately, but  when  he  compelled  protestants  to  catholic 
services  on  his  own  domains,  and  made  them  subject 
to  the  catholic  clergy,  the  royal  charter  was  plainly  a 
dead  letter.    Protestants  began  to  prepare  for  the  worst. 

1  From  Maximilian  I  [1493- 15 19],  the  succession  of  emperors  was  [i] 
his  grandson  Charles  V,  i5i9-'58,  [ii]  C.'s  brother  Ferdinand  I,  i558-'64, 
[iii]  F.'s  son  Maximilian  II,  1564-1 '76,  [iv]  M.'s  son  Rudolph  II,  1576— 
1612,  [v]  R.'s  brother  Mathias,  i6i2-'i9,  [vi]  M.'s  cousin  and  adopted 
son  Ferdinand  II,  i6i9-'37,  [vn]  F.'s  son  Ferdinand  III,  i637~'58.  Maxi- 
milian II  married  his  cousin,  daughter  of  Charles  V,  and  had  15  children. 
Ferdinand  II  was  the  son  of  the  13th  son  of  Ferdinand  I. 

2  These  were  little  more  than  administrative  divisions,  and  did  not 
annul  the  single  sovereignty  of  the  head  of  the  Hapsburg  house. 


3 18  THE    THIRTY    YEARS*    WAR 

3  Emphatically  disproving  Macaulay's  easy  generalization,  making  prot- 
estantism Teutonic  and  Catholicism  after  the  Reformation  non-Teutonic  or 
Romanic.  These  provinces  were  the  most  strongly  Romanic  parts  of  the 
then  empire.  Cf.  {  II,  below,  and  Hausser,  ch.  xxxi.  Maximilian  II  was 
half  a  protestant,  giving  the  new  faith  its  start.  His  successors,  its  foes, 
killed  it  out. 

4  On  the  relation  of  Bohemia  and  Hungary  to  Austria,  Freeman,  Hist'l 
Geog.,  324  sqq.  Bohemia  was  a  member  of  the  empire,  Hungary  not. 
Bohemia  had  previously  been  under  the  Austrian  crown  for  a  brief  time, 
viz.,  from  about  1440  to  1457,  but  the  relation  was  permanently  estab- 
lished only  on  the  marriage  of  Ferdinand,  soon-to-be  emperor  Ferd.  II, 
with  Anna,  sister  of  the  deceased  king  Ludwig  of  Hungary  and  Bohemia, 
who  fell  in  the  battle  of  Mohacs,  1526,  against  the  Turks.  The  dependent 
lands  of  Lusatia,  Silesia  and  Moravia  passed  at  the  same  time.  Excepting 
the  brief  rule  of  Frederic  [§  11]  and  the  revolution-time  of  i848-'9,  Hun- 
gary and  Bohemia  have  ever  since  obeyed  the  Hapsburg  sceptre.  It  must 
be  said,  however,  that  Hapsburg  was  during  and  long  after  Ferdinand's 
day  obliged  to  share  Hungary  partly  with  the  Turks,  partly  with  Hunga- 
rian rivals. 

5  Hussite,  called  '  utraquist '  from  its  gift  to  the  laity  of  the  communion 
in  both  kinds:  sub  utraque  specie.  Gindely,  ch.  iii.  Nearly  all  Bohe- 
mian protestants  belonged  to  this  confession,  being  neither  Lutherans  nor 
Calvinists. 

6  Hausser,  II,  86,  mistakenly  states  that  the  permission  was  universal, 
which  Gindely,  ch.  i,  disproves. 

7  Gindely  [large  original],  vol.  i,  ch.  ii,  best  discusses  this.  The  prot- 
estants interpreted  the  constitution  as  including  ecclesiastical  lands  among 
royal.  Another  ominous  fact  was  the  administration  of  the  land  by  a 
board  of  seven  Statthalter,  of  whom  four  were  catholics. 


§  9    War  Begun  :    Periods 

Ranke,  Popes,  bk.  vii,  ch.  ii.     Gardiner,  ch.  ii.     Villermont,  ch.  v.     Gindely, 
I,  i,  ii.    Motley,  Barneveld,  ch.  xiii. 

The  throne  of  Bohemia  had  originally  been  elective, 
and  the  estates  endured,  expecting  soon,  on  Mathias's 
death,  to  choose  a  protestant  king,  either  the  Elector 
Palatinate  or   the  Elector  of   Saxony.      But   before  a 


THE  THIRTY  YEARS  WAR  319 

Bohemian  diet  called  in  1617,  the  emperor's  lawyers 
maintained1  that  Mathias's  election  was  exceptional, 
and  partly  by  specious  argument,  partly  by  intimidation, 
brought  the  estates  to  renounce  their  right  of  electing 
a  king,  and  to  accept  Archduke  Ferdinand  as  their  king 
by  hereditary  right.  Such  a  coup  d'e'tat  was  rendered 
easier  in  that  Ferdinand,  bigoted  catholic  though  he 
was,  accepted  the  royal  charter.  Bohemia's  golden 
time  for  opposing  Austria  was  thus  lost.  The  Kloster- 
grab  church  was  soon  levelled  and  protestants  excluded 
from  that  in  Braunau.  Revolt  seemed  the  only  prot- 
estant  road  to  freedom.  On  May  23,  1618,  occurred 
the  famous  '  defenstration ' 2  of  the  emperor's  represen- 
tatives in  Prag.  By  this  act  the  protestant  leaders  in 
Bohemia  proclaimed  defiance  and  invoked  war  —  a  war 
which  raged  from  Alps  to  Baltic  and  from  Moravia  to 
the  Atlantic,  a  war  which,  while  especially  devastating 
and  impoverishing  all  Germany,  involved,  the  first  war 
in  all  history  to  do  this,  every  country  of  Europe.  The 
years  from  16 18  to  1648  naturally  fall  into  two  main 
periods,  divided  by  the  Edict  of  Restitution,  1629,  the 
diplomatic  intervention  of  France  and  the  armed  of 
Sweden,  1630.  In  the  first  period,  predominantly  re- 
ligious, marked  by  imperial  triumph  and  ended  by  the 
subjugation  of  all  Germany,  were  three  phases  (1)  the 
Bohemian,  to  the  battle  of  White  Mountain,  1620,  (2) 
the  Palatinate,  to  the  Danish  intervention,  1625,  (3)  the 
Danish.  In  the  second  or  Swedish-French  period, 
almost  solely  political,  which  sees  the  decline  of  impe- 
rial power,  are  also  three  phases,  (4)  a  victorious  and  (5) 
a  disastrous  Swedish,  separated  by  the  death  of  Gusta- 


320  THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR 

vus  Adolphus,  November,  1632,  the  last  ending  with  the 
Treaty  of  Prag,  1635,  which  virtually  renewed  the  Edict 
of  Restitution,  and  (6)  the  phase  of  armed  French  inter- 
vention, extending  to  the  end  of  the  war,  1648. 

1  Gindely,  ch.  i,  sec.  3,  admits  that  all  the  Hapsburg  accessions  to  the 
Bohemian  crown  except  that  of  Mathias  alone  had  been  by  way  of  accept- 
ing \annehmen~\,  not  of  electing,  but  notices  that  this  last  had  as  good  p 
right,  so  far  as  it  went,  to  become  an  authoritative  precedent  as  had  that 
of  Ferdinand  I  in  1526.  That  election  was  the  ancient  way  all  seem  to 
have  conceded. 

2  The  Statthalter  Martinitz  and  Slawata  and  the  Secretary  Fabricius 
were  thrown  from  the  windows  of  the  Prag  Castle,  the  '  good  old  Bohe- 
mian custom '  for  inflicting  capital  punishment.  They  fell  nearly  60  feet, 
yet,  by  a  miracle  as  catholics  believed,  not  one  was  killed  or  greatly 
harmed. 

§  10    Attitude  of  Europe 

Gindely,  I,  iv.  Ranke,  Popes,  bk.  vii,  ch.  iii.  Villertnont,  ch.  xiv.  Gardiner,  ch. 
iii,  se£.  3,  ch.  iv,  sec.  4;  Prince  Charles  and  the  Spanish  Marriage.  Hallam, 
Const'l  Hist.,  on  reign  of  Charles  I.    Motley,  Bameveld. 

His  noble  subjects  being  hostile  to  Ferdinand,  elected 
emperor  in  1619,1  so  that  no  Austrian  power  was  at 
hand  to  be  mistaken  for  imperial,  we  see  best  at  the 
opening  of  this  war  how  low  imperial  authority  had 
sunk.  Ferdinand  was  thrown  for  resources  entirely 
upon  free-will  offerings.  Spain  was  his  chief  support. 
Philip  III,  now  in  fear  of  death  and  feeling  the  whole 
honor  and  fortune  of  his  house  to  be  involved  in  the 
emperor's  success,  sent  enormous  subsidies.2  Other 
earnest  allies  of  the  emperor  were  the  pope,  the  League,3 
the  Grand  Duke  of  Tuscany,  and  the  King  of  Poland, 
the  last  two  his  brothers-in-law.  Even  Karl  Emanuel 
of  Savoy,  at  first  reckoned,  and  inclined  to  be,  a  prot- 
estant,  so  soon  as  disappointed  in  his  hope  of  election 


THE   THIRTY   YEARS     WAR  321 

to  the  Bohemian  crown,  offered  his  services  to  Ferdi- 
nand,4 as  did  John  George  of  Saxony  while  still  profess- 
ing fullest  devotion  to  protestant  principles.  The 
motive  to  these  alliances  even  where  least  selfish,  was 
not  loyalty  or  political  duty,  but  either  religion,  friend- 
ship, policy,  or  hatred  to  some  member  of  the  Union. 
Louis  XIII,  Bourbon  though  he  was,  swayed  by  his 
clergy,  acted  at  first,  strange  to  say,  favorably  to  Haps- 
burg  interests.5  He  would  allow  France  to  mediate, 
but  not  to  oppose  the  emperor.  Even  Richelieu  tried 
to  pacify  Hungary.  The  neutrality  of  England,  whence 
Frederic  V  of  the  Palatinate  hoped  so  much,  was  still 
more  remarkable.  At  length  a  thoroughly  protestant 
nation,  the  English  almost  to  a  man  wished  to  support 
the  revolt,  especially  as  Frederic,  now  its  head,  was  son- 
in-law  to  their  king.  But  James  I,  infatuated  with  the 
thought  of  a  Spanish  alliance,  feeling  the  gravity  of 
Frederic's  course,  which  much  resembled  the  individ- 
ualism and  '  fist-right '  of  the  dark  ages,  and  offended 
at  his  rash  openness  to  Bohemian  advances,  would  not 
send  a  shilling  or  a  man  to  aid  the  Bohemian  cause.6 
Trifling  assistance  came  from  Silesia  and  Lusatia, 
sympathy  from  Denmark  and  Sweden.  Holland7  was 
the  only  ally  on  whom  the  rebels  could  depend. 

1  On  the  imbroglio  at  this  election,  Hausser,  II,  98  sqq. 

2  Yet  with  his  ministers,  Khevenhiller,  Ferdinand's  ambassador,  labored 
long  in  vain  and  went  so  far  as  to  threaten  peace  with  protestants,  cession 
of  Bohemia  and  Hungary,  Austria  to  recoup  itself  with  a  piece  of  the 
Spanish  Netherlands.  '  Look  out  for  your  neck,  speaking  so,'  said  Aliaga, 
Philip's  confessor.  '  I  will  gladly  die  for  my  master,'  replied  Khevenhiller, 
'  but  not  exchange  with  you,  for  your  place  in  hell  will  be  lower  than 
Luther's  or  Calvin's.' 

8  Maximilian  of  Bavaria  its  leader  and  most  earnest  member,  earnest 


322  THE   THIRTY   YEARS     WAR 

to  be  sure  not  for  strictly  imperial  interests  [§  13]  but  for  Catholicism. 
The  duke  had  beforehand  the  emperor's  promise  of  the  palatinate  elector- 
ship in  case  Frederic  accepted  the  Bohemian  election,  and  of  whatever 
palatinate  territory  should  be  conquered  in  the  war.  Gindely,  ch.  iv,  sec.  3. 
But  for  this  promise  the  war  might  have  ended  in  1623.  The  pope  sent 
subsidies  to  both  emperor  and  League  —  strange  direction  for  money  to 
take! 

4  But  they  were  not  accepted.  Ferdinand  did  not  know  how  far  Karl 
Emanuel  had  gone  with  the  protestants,  but  suspected. 

5  Yet  in  1622  he  made  peace  with  the  Huguenots,  in  1623  sent  money 
to  German  protestants,  in  1624  called  Richelieu  to  his  councils,  which  very 
soon  involved  resumption  of  France's  traditional  anti-Hapsburg  policy. 
Ranke  is  uncertain  whether  or  not  the  great  cardinal  cherished  his  anti- 
Hapsburg  purpose  at  first. 

6  The  utmost  which  James  could  be  induced  to  do  was  to  promise 
Frederic  ^"25,000  for  defence  of  the  Palatinate  and  to  mediate  a  loan  for 
him  from  the  king  of  Denmark,  his  brother-in-law.  Private  parties  in 
England  sent  ^13,000  as  a  further  loan.  The  young  electress  Elizabeth, 
Frederic's  wife  and  James  I's  daughter,  was  the  mother  of  Rupert,  the 
famous  cavalier  in  the  campaigns  against  Cromwell  in  England,  where  he 
fought  for  his  uncle,  Charles  I.  He  was  born  just  before  the  battle  of 
White  Mountain  [next  §] .  It  was  through  this  Elizabeth  that  the  English 
royal  house  of  Hannover  descended  from  James  I. 

7  Elector  Frederic  V  was,  through  his  mother,  the  grandson  of  William 
of  Orange. 


§  11     Bohemian  Phase  of  the  War 

Ranke,  as  at  §  9.     Gardiner,  chaps,  ii,  iii.    Gindely,  I,  v,  vi  [cf.  his  large 
original,  vol.  iii] .    H'dusser,  ch.  xxxii. 

This  began  with  victory.  Moravia,  Silesia,  Hungary 
and  the  Austrian  estates  aid,  and  the  imperialists  are 
driven  within  the  gates  of  Vienna.  But  this  success 
resulted  ill,  leading  the  rebels  to  underestimate  the  mag- 
nitude of  the  contest  begun.  By  electing  Frederic 
king  they  not  only  invited  the  emperor's  uttermost 
efforts   for  vengeance,   but   alienated   friends.      Their 


THE    THIRTY    YEARS     WAR  323 

army,  too  small,  unpaid,  irregularly  recruited,  poorly 
equipped  and  disciplined,  lapsed  into  a  mob.  The  new 
king,1  young,  rash,  fickle  and  without  energy,  brought 
his  kingdom  neither  internal  betterment  nor  foreign 
allies.  His  chief  advisers  disagreed.2  The  Union, 
about  passive  all  along,  dissolved  in  1621.  On  the  other 
hand  defeat  roused  Ferdinand  to  incredible  exertion. 
Mustering  a  considerable3  army,  Spanish  and  Saxon, 
with  that  of  the  League,  he  breaks  the  siege  of  Vienna, 
pushes  back  Mansfield  and  Thurn,  and  in  the  battle  of 
White  Mountain,4  1620,  forces  Bohemia  to  sue  for  peace. 
The  king  barely  escapes,  the  charter  is  declared  null, 
Bohemia  loses  all  vestige  of  independence.  Protestant- 
ism was  so  totally  suppressed  that  the  country  continues 
to  this  day  more  catholic  than  Rome.5  Twenty-seven 
leaders  in  the  rebellion  were  beheaded  and  an  equal 
number  spared  the  same  fate  only  by  flight.  Seven 
hundred  and  twenty-eight  nobles  suffered  total  confisca- 
tion of  property,  thirty  thousand  families  left  the  land 
and  the  entire  population  that  had  sympathized  with 
the  rising  was  reduced  to  beggary. 

1  He  was  but  23  years  old,  and  although  pawning  some  jewels  to 
secure  funds  for  the  war,  showed  little  zeal  on  the  whole.  He  was  too 
Calvinistic  and  strict,  insisted  that  crucifixes,  pictures  and  the  like  be  re- 
moved from  churches,  etc.  Elizabeth  too  was  no  favorite  while  in  Prag. 
A  contemporary  poet  sang  of  Frederic : 

'  O  lieber  Friez,  tnein  gut  Gesell, 
Lass fahren  diese  Kron  ! 
Bereitet  ist  dir  schon  die  Hell 
Zu  einem  gewissen  Lohn. 
Denn  ivelcher  sich  erhohen  thut, 
F'dllt  tie/ in  den  Abgrund; 
Ihm  urird  vergolten  sein  Hochntuth 
Wol  in  der  Hellen  Schlund' 

2  Anhalt,  Mansfield  and  Thurn.  They  did  not  act  in  concert.  Thus 
Mansfield  was  net  present  at  White  Mountain  but  engaged  in  the  siege  of 


324  THE   THIRTY   YEARS     WAR 

Pilsen,  the  chief  Bohemian  city  that  adhered  to  the  imperial  cause. 
Gindely,  ch.  v,  at  end,  alleges  that  at  this  time  Mansfield  was  making 
overtures  to  League  and  emperor  to  accept  him  into  their  service.  He 
demanded  400,000  gulden  and  full  amnesty. 

3  All  the  military  operations  of  the  opening  war  were  on  a  petty  scale. 
Schlick  crossed  the  Austrian  border  with  4000  men.  Mansfield  captured 
Pilsen  with  but  1800.  At  White  Mountain  the  protestants  had  13,000, 
the  catholics  together  24,000. 

*  As  the  armies  faced  each  other  just  prior  to  this  battle  the  men  of 
each  amused  themselves  by  calling  those  of  the  other  names :  '  heretics,' 
'rebels/  'countrymen,'  'buffoons'  in  one  direction,  'papists,'  'robbers,' 
'  incendiaries,'  etc.,  in  the  other.  '  Hogs '  was  an  epithet  constantly  ap- 
plied to  the  Bavarians,  and  not  by  the  enemy  alone.  Maximilian  asked 
his  court  jester  how  he  thought  the  battle  would  go.  '  Just  as  at  cards,' 
he  replied,  '  the  sow  [then  the  name  for  the  ace]  will  take  the  king,'  i.e., 
the  Bavarians  would  beat  the  sham  king  of  Bohemia.  The  Bohemians 
tried  to  engage  the  Turks  in  their  cause,  —  without  success. 

5  On  these  terrible  proceedings,  Gindely,  ch.  vi,  and  Reuss,  La  destruc- 
tion du  protestantisme  en  Boheme,  Strassburg,  1867.  The  Bohemian 
Brethren,  same  as  the  modern  Moravians,  were  driven  out  at  once,  the 
Lutherans  a  little  later.  Anabaptists  were  treated  with  especial  cruelty. 
The  Gneisenau  family,  from  whom  sprung  the  Gneisenau  of  Ligny  and 
Waterloo  fame  [Ch.  X,  §  19],  was  among  the  emigrants.  At  the  begin- 
ning of  this  war  in  the  Bohemian  county  of  Glatz  not  a  single  catholic 
church  remained,  all  having  gone  over  to  protestantism.  When  Frederic 
the  Great  marched  into  the  county  some  125  years  later  the  population 
was  catholic  to  a  man,  and  in  the  middle  of  it  stood  proudly  the  Pilgrim 
Church  of  Albendorf  as  a  monument  to  the  catholic  victory  of  White 
Mountain. — Treitschke,  D.  Gesch.  in  XIX  Jahrh.,  I,  II.  Some  estates  of 
banished  owners  were  wholly  confiscated,  some  only  in  part,  the  residue 
to  be  paid  by  the  government.  Payment  was  made  in  coins  worth  only 
^  their  face,  which  were  then  declared  no  longer  a  tender  except  at  their 
real  value.  The  emperor  wished  to  use  the  same  inhumanity  in  Lusatia, 
conquered  by  John  George,  as  in  Bohemia,  desisting  only  when  that  slug- 
gish prince,  much  to  his  credit,  threatened  active  enmity.  Tilly  is  believed 
to  have  been  purposely  slow  after  the  battle,  to  give  protestants  opportunity 
for  flight. 


the  thirty  years   war  325 

§  12     Palatinate  Phase 

Ranke,  as  at  §  9.     Gardiner,  ch.  iii.     Gindcly,  I,  vii  [large  original,  vol.  iv.] 

Frederic  was,  without  trial,  stripped  of  his  lands  and 
his  electoral  dignity  and  put  to  the  ban  of  the  empire, 
1 62 1,  his  fellow-electors  of  Saxony  and  Brandenburg 
protesting  yet  declining  to  make  common  cause  with 
him.1  A  slight  lull  in  hostilities  was  effected  by  the 
strong  wish  of  Spain,  exhausted  and  impoverished2 
through  her  long  struggle  in  the  Netherlands,  of  which 
for  her  this  new  war  was  the  continuation.  But,  a  con- 
ference at  Brussels  toward  peace,  1622,  having  failed 
owing  to  the  inability  of  either  side  to  suggest  other 
than  temporizing  plans,  war  began  afresh,  Tilly  and 
Spain  on  one  side,  against  Mansfield,  Christian  of 
Brunswick,  the  Burggrave  of  Bade-Durlach  and  the 
English  General  Vere.  These  last,  dividing3  in  the 
face  of  Tilly,  that  unmatched  strategist  defeated  one 
by  one :  reverses  which  Mansfield's  subsequent  slight 
success  against  the  Spaniards4  could  not  retrieve. 
Meantime  the  Diet  of  Regensburg,  1623,5  against  the 
will  of  Saxony  and  Brandenburg  and  the  solemn  pro- 
test of  Spain's  ambassador,6  sanctions  the  spoliation  of 
Frederic  and  bestows  his  electorship"  with  the  High 
Palatinate  upon  Maximilian  of  Bavaria,  Spain  retain- 
ing the  Rhenish.  The  whole  Palatinate  was  forcibly 
brought  back  to  Catholicism,  Lusatia  passed  to  Saxony.8 

1  His  rash  act  had  frightened  them.  Saxony  opposed  him  also  because 
should  he  recover  Bohemia  he  would  be  too  contiguous  and  too  powerful, 
aside  from  his  having  two  electoral  votes,  a  thing  unheard  of.  The  Agree- 
ment of  Miihlhausen  also  greatly  quieted  these  electors,  League  and  em- 
peror promising  that  no  protestant  Furst  holding  secularized  property 
should  be  disturbed  so  long  as  loyal  to  the  empire. 


326  THE   THIRTY   YEARS'    WAR 

3  Contrary  to  common  opinion  Spain  was  never  a  wealthy  land.  See 
Roscher,  Pol.  Economy,  I,  181.  By  this  time  it  was  far  from  powerful  in 
any  respect. 

8  Partly  because  they  could  not  agree,  partly  the  better  to  support  their 
armies  on  plunder.  Vere  was  left  in  charge  of  Heidelberg,  Mannheim 
and  Frankenthal.  Tilly  vanquishes  the  others,  Bade-Durlach  at  Wimpfen, 
Brunswick  at  Hochst,  then  returns  to  dislodge  Vere.  Frederic  now  dis- 
misses Mansfield  and  Brunswick,  who  turn  freebooters.  Both  make  their 
way  to  Holland,  where  they  are  strong  enough  to  force  the  Spaniards  to 
raise  the  siege  of  Bergen-op-Zoom.  They  then  enter  and  ravage  West- 
phalia. Tilly,  unable  to  drive  them  out,  invades  the  Lower  Saxon  Circle, 
to  induce  the  wavering  protestant  princes  there  to  side  with  the  empire 
against  those  marauders. 

*  The  1 2-year  truce  of  Spain  with  the  Netherlands  agreed  to  in  1609 
was  now  over,  and  hostilities  had  begun  again.  The  operations  of  that 
war  are  mainly  indistinguishable  from  those  of  the  30  Years'  War  at  large. 

6  It  had  convened  on  Nov.  22  of  the  preceding  year.  Hausser  will 
not  call  this  or  any  other  '  meeting  of  the  princes'  a  '  diet,'  till  1640. 

6  Spain  objected  partly  out  of  regard  for  James  I,  partly  from  fear  that 
so  violent  a  measure  would  indefinitely  prolong  the  war. 

7  On  the  history  of  the  electorships,  Ch.  V,  §  8,  n.  5.  The  High  Pala- 
tinate was  in  what  is  now  northern  Bavaria,  roughly  coincident  with  the 
triangle  formed  by  the  cities  of  Regensburg,  Nurnberg  and  Eger.  The 
Lower  was  the  land  on  both  sides  of  the  Rhine  about  Heidelberg,  reach- 
ing from  Wimpfen  on  the  eastern  side  nearly  to  Trier  on  the  western,  and 
northward  on  the  left  bank  of  the  river  to  beyond  the  Main-mouth. 
Three-fourths  of  it  were  west  of  the  Rhine.  Protestants  who  would  not 
recant  were  banished.  Elector  Frederic  V  died  Nov.  17,  1632,  eleven 
days  after  Gustavus  Adolphus.  Elizabeth  lived  30  years  from  this  time  in 
the  Hague,  then  in  England  till  her  death  in  1662. 

8  To  pay  for  John  George's  aid  to  the  emperor. 


§  13     Danish  Phase:    Waldstein 

Gardiner,  chaps,  iv-vii.     Gindely,  I,  viii,  uc.     Hausser,  ch.  xxxiii. 

The  protestant  rulers  were  now  thoroughly  alarmed,1 
and  King  Christian  IV  of  Denmark,  who  as  Duke  of 
Holstein  was  a  Fiirst  of  the  empire,  partly  perhaps  out 


THE   THIRTY   YEARS'    WAR  327 

of  fear2  that  Gustavus  Adolphus  would  do  this,  put 
himself  forward  as  the  armed  champion  of  protestantism 
against  emperor  and  League.  Receiving  money  from 
Richelieu  and  promises  from  England  and  Holland  he 
crosses  the  Elbe  in  1625  and  for  one  campaign  can  defy 
Tilly.  But  a  helper  far  mightier  than  Christian  had 
meantime  enlisted  on  the  emperor's  side,  —  Waldstein,3 
whose  rise  was  the  greatest  event  in  the  war  thus  far, 
giving  Ferdinand  an  army  of  his  own.  Hitherto  he 
had  not  had  this,  Tilly  being  in  the  service  of  Maxi- 
milian and  the  League,  who,  notice,  in  reality  cared  for 
the  empire  little  more  than  did  the  protestant  chiefs 
themselves.  With  one  stroke  Waldstein4  crushes 
Mansfield  at  Dessau,  1626,  so  that  he  reappears  no 
more,  then  rushes  to  the  defeat  already  begun  by  Tilly, 
of  Christian,  who  is  forced  to  the  Peace  of  Liibeck, 
1629,  and  to  abstain  henceforth  from  the  quarrel.5  In 
the  same  year  1629  follows  the  Edict  of  Restitution? 
the  protestants  to  restore  all  ecclesiastical  property 
taken  since  Augsburg  and  only  the  adherents  of  the 
Augsburg  confession  to  have  free  exercise  of  religion. 
This  terrible  decree  was  executed  in  its  own  stern  spirit, 
partly  by  Tilly,  partly  by  Waldstein,  now  Duke  of 
Mecklenburg  and  Admiral  of  the  Baltic,  holding  North 
Germany  with  a  hundred  thousand  men. 

1  If  the  emperor  could  so  summarily  dispose  of  one  protestant  state  he 
might  of  another.  Besides,  in  the  vain  peace  negotiations  of  1626  Ferdi- 
nand and  Maximilian  would  no  longer  hold  out  the  Miihlhausen  promise 
[§  12,  n.  1]  to  guarantee  secularized  bishoprics  in  present  hands  on  con- 
dition of  loyalty. 

2  Droysen  believes  this  to  have  been  a  strong  motive,  which  Gardiner 
doubts.  Brandenburg  and  Sweden  were  negotiating.  Christian  would  of 
course  belong  in  the  Lower  Saxon  Circle,  where  Tilly's  presence  was  a 


328  THE   THIRTY    YEARS*    WAR 

burden  and  a  threat.  Charles  I  of  England  promised  Christian  money  but 
could  not  get  parliament  to  vote  it.  The  Danish  king  called  this  the 
cause  of  his  defeat.  A  small  amount  was  actually  raised  by  Charles's 
unconstitutional  forced  loan,  and  Sir  Charles  Morgan  sent  to  Christian's 
aid  with  four  or  five  thousand  men,  not  enough  to  alter  the  result. 

8  Albrecht  von  '  Waldstein '  [according  to  Gindely  and  Oncken  the 
original  form  of  the  name,  Hist.  Zeitschr.  yahrg.  1883,  562]  was  born  in 
1583  at  Hermanic  in  Bohemia  of  a  Utraquist  [§  8,  n.  5]  family,  and  early 
orphaned.  He  received  education  first  at  the  Jesuit  school  in  Olniutz, 
then  in  Altdorf,  then  in  Padua,  where  mathematics  and  military  studies 
engaged  him.  He  travelled  much  in  the  empire  and  abroad.  For  ser- 
vices against  Venice  in  161 7  Ferdinand  made  him  colonel  and  count. 
Enormously  rich  by  both  inheritance  and  marriage  he  purchased  a  vast 
number  of  the  estates  confiscated  in  Bohemia  after  1620.  He  maintained 
a  more  than  royal  pomp  and  state.  Defence  of  the  emperor  from  the 
Hungarians  made  him  a  Furst  of  the  empire  as  duke  of  Friedland,  1624. 
Waldstein  began  life  among  protestants  but  became  catholic,  William  the 
Silent  started  as  a  catholic  but  turned  protestant  On  the  question  of 
Waldstein's  guilt,  §  16,  n.  5. 

4  With  50,000  men,  recruited  in  the  most  irregular  and  illegal  manner. 
Mansfield,  the  soldier  of  fortune,  flees  with  a  puny  force  through  Silesia 
to  Hungary,  hoping  for  an  alliance  with  Bethlen  Gabor,  head  of  the  Hun- 
garian protestant  revolt  Coldly  received  he  pushes  on  to  Venice,  where 
sickness  seizes  him  and  he  retires  to  a  village  of  Bosnia  to  die. 

6  Later,  i643~'6,  Christian  even  aided  the  imperialists,  envious  of  the 
Swedes. 

6  Hausser,  II,  123  sqq.;  Gardiner,  ch.  vii.  The  edict  was  carried  through 
in  Swabia,  Franconia,  Westphalia  and  Lower  Saxony.  Khevenhiller  [§  10, 
n.  2]  believed  Richelieu  to  be  the  real  inspirer  of  this  edict,  as  well  as  of 
the  dismissal  of  Waldstein,  later.  The  catholic  victory  was  complete, 
except  at  Stralsund,  which,  succored  from  Sweden,  Waldstein  could  nut 
take,  and  'every  electoral  prince,  every  petty  vassal,  neutral  or  belligerent, 
awaited  in  anxious  suspense  the  announcement  of  Ferdinand's  terms' 
[Tuttle]. 


THE   THIRTY    YEARS '    WAR  329 


§  14    Waldstein's  Policy 

Ranke,  Gesch.  IVallensteins.     Gindely,  II,  i.     Gardiner   «s  at  §  13. 
Schilling,  Quellenbuch,  127. 

While  Waldstein  brought  to  the  emperor  indepen. 
dence  and  sweeping  victory,  his  intervention  and  policy, 
under  the  circumstances,  prepared  ultimate  defeat  by 
alienating  the  League  from  imperial  interests.  I  Wald- 
stein wished  only  to  punish  breach  of  imperial  law  and 
constitution,1  the  League  to  annihilate  protestantism. 
2  He  forced  catholics  to  help  support  his  army,  which 
the  League  opposed.  3  He  proposed  to  turn  over  all 
lands  confiscated  in  the  Lower  Saxon  Circle  to  George 
of  Liineburg,  a  Lutheran  general  in  his  army :  the 
ecclesiastical  Elector  of  Mainz  claimed  a  part.  4  His 
abstractly  most  rational  but  at  the  same  time  most  im- 
practicable and  fatal  idea  was  to  recover  sovereignty 
and  public  power  in  the  empire  entirely  to  the  emperor, 
humbling  and  subordinating  the  nobility  as  had  been 
done  in  France  and  England.  This  thought,  along  with 
Waldstein's  unexpected  triumphs,  led  Ferdinand,  fancy- 
ing himself  another  Charles  V  or  Karl  the  Great,  into 
foolish  and  wholly  illegal  measures.  He  raised  money 
without  the  diet's  sanction,  put  the  dukes  of  Mecklen- 
burg 2  to  ban  without  process,  invested  one  of  his  sons 
with  four  bishoprics,  gave  to  Jesuits  instead  of  its  orig- 
inal possessors  most  of  the  property  wrested  from  prot- 
estants. 

1  He  used  to  say,  'The  devil  and  hell-fire  take  the  priests'  [Hausser]. 

2  They  were  restored  to  their  regular  standing  and  estates  by  the  diet 
of  Regensburg  in  1630. 


330  THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR 


§  15    Gustavus  Adolphus 

Mebold,  vol.  ii.     Droysen,  Bernhardt  v.  Weimar,  bk.  i.     Gardiner, 
ch.  iv,  sec.  5,  ch.  vii.     Gindely,  II,  ii. 

This  great  king,  who  had  long  been  waiting *  to  strike 
a  blow  on  the  protestant  side,  now  saw  his  opportunity. 
France  was  renewing  against  the  empire  her  old  pre- 
tensions in  Italy  and  had  already  taken  some  towns. 
If  the  emperor  did  not  yield  here  Richelieu  was  certain 
to  support  Gustavus.  Those  protestant  chiefs  who  in- 
clined to  be  loyal  to  the  emperor  and  to  fear  Gustavus 
as  a  foreigner,  would  still  side  with  the  latter  unless  the 
Edict  of  Restitution  were  modified.  At  this  great 
crisis2  Ferdinand  yielded  to  his  zeal  for  the  church  and 
gave  up  the  last  chance  which  ever  presented  itself  to 
make  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  a  unit  and  a  power. 
To  his  protestant  subjects  he  would  concede  nothing 
save  the  dismission  of  Waldstein,  which  the  catholics 
also  demanded,  while  with  France  he  negotiated  so  ill 
that  Richelieu  became  an  active  supporter  of  Gustavus. 
Outlook  for  both  parties  was  now  totally  changed : 
Waldstein  idle,  even  the  League  suspecting  the  em- 
peror, Saxony  at  last  as  well  as  Brandenburg  in  arms 
against  him.  The  protestants  on  the  other  hand  were 
for  the  first  time  united,  led  by  the  ablest  captain  alive, 
backed  by  French  money  and  the  diplomacy  3  of  Riche- 
lieu. In  that  rich  galaxy  of  great4  men  which  illus- 
trates the  Thirty  Years'  War,  Gustavus  Adolphus  is 
the  principal  star.  Gustavus  rex,  wrote  Cardinal  Ca- 
raffa,6  cui  parem  Suecia  nullum,  Europa  paucos  dedit. 
His  policy  —  he  the  first  protestant  leader  to  have  one 


THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR  33 1 

—  was  positive  and  constructive,  aiming  at  (i)  the 
dominion  of  the  Baltic  Sea,  (2)  a  corpus  evangelicorutn, 
to  be  realized  if  necessary  by  creating  a  protestant  em- 
pire, and  (3)  the  use  of  Richelieu  to  the  furtherance  of 
protestantism  instead  of  allowing  the  wily  cardinal,  as 
he  wished  to  do  and  finally  did,  merely  to  aggrandize 
France  at  Germany's  expense.  In  war  the  general 
before  whom  both  Tilly  and  Waldstein  preferred  to 
retreat  was  even  greater  than  in  diplomacy,  worthy 
of  the  rank  assigned  him  by  Napoleon  as  the  foremost 
captain  of  all  history.  He  invented  a  more  efficient 
order  of  battle  for  both  infantry  and  cavalry,  at  the 
same  time  making  artillery  so  light  as  to  march  and 
manoeuvre  with  a  speed  never  previously  attained.  Be- 
fore his  soldiers,  moral,  conscientious,  the  best  disci- 
plined in  Europe,  adoring  and  obeying  him  and  using 
his  tactics,  the  hireling  armies  of  that  age  could  not 
stand  a  moment. 

1  Concurrent  motives  were  i)  to  avenge  the  dukes  of  Mecklenburg, 
his  relatives,  ii)  to  revenge  the  refusal  of  his  mediation  at  the  Peace  of 
Ltibeck,  iii)  to  defeat  plans  to  make  the  empire  a  Baltic  power,  and  iv)  to 
pay  back  Austria  for  aiding  Poland  against  Sweden  [n.  2].  For  the  just 
antecedent  Swedish  history,  Hausser,  II,  131  sqq.  Gustavus  inherited 
from  his  father  three  wars,  i)  with  Denmark,  neither  party  being  victo- 
rious, ii)  with  Russia,  Sweden  securing  the  entire  Baltic  coast  of  that 
country,  and  iii)  with  Poland,  lasting  till  1629,  ending  with  the  recogni- 
tion of  Sweden's  claim  to  the  whole  Baltic  coast  opposite  Poland,  and  the 
cession  of  considerable  tracts  besides.  The  Polish  king,  Sigismund,  was 
Gustavus's  nephew,  but  as  a  catholic  and  the  brother-in-law  of  the  em- 
peror, he  had  received  active  aid  from  the  latter  in  the  war.  Promised 
1,200,000  livres  annually  by  Richelieu  Gustavus  lands  in  Pomerania  in 
1630,  just  as  Richelieu,  leading  his  army  in  person,  has  become  master  of 
Savoy  and  orders  an  advance  on  Saluzzo.  At  first  only  the  Mecklenburg 
dukes  and  a  few  other  lords  join  him.  The  hesitation  of  Saxony  and 
Brandenburg,  yet  hoping  for  fair  terms  from  Ferdinand,  loses  Magdeburg 


332  THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR 

to  the  protestants,  its  commandant  burning  it  to  prevent  its  falling  into 
imperialist  hands.  This  decides  the  wavering  electors.  Gardiner,  130 
sqq.,  Tuttle's  Prussia,  ch.  iv. 

2  The  greatest  crisis  of  the  17th  century  [Gindely  II,  419].  Turning 
point  was  the  diet  of  Regensburg,  1630,  where  Maximilian,  acting  for  the 
League,  succeeded  in  getting  Waldstein  dismissed  and  in  preventing  the 
election  of  the  emperor's  son  as  king  of  the  Romans  [Ch.  V,  §  9,  n.  2 J 
Richelieu's  hand  was  in  all  this.  Eggenberg,  Ferdinand's  minister,  urged 
conciliation  of  Saxony  and  Brandenburg  at  all  hazards,  but  Jesuit  influ- 
ence was  against  this.  See  Fagniez  [Rev.  hist.,  Jan. -Feb.,  1885],  Pere 
jfoseph  a  la  diete  de  Ratisbon,  1630.  Even  Breitenfeld  did  not  change  a 
whit  the  Jesuits'  determination  to  carry  through  the  edict  everywhere. 

8  He  created  a  fleet  to  harass  Spain,  treated  with  Holland,  Switzerland, 
Mantua  and  Parma  in  the  same  interest,  and  planned  to  stir  up  revolts  in 
Portugal  and  Catalonia. 

4  Besides  the  Swedish  king  himself,  Richelieu,  Mazarin,  Oxenstierna, 
and  the  generals  Waldstein  [§  13,  n.  3],  Tilly,  Bernhard,  Mansfield,  Tors- 
tenson,  W7rangel,  Guebriant,  Baner,  Horn,  Conde  and  Turenne.  Gardiner 
depreciates  Cond6,  idolizes  Turenne. 

6  The  papal  nuncio  who  superintended  the  re-conversion  of  Bohemia 
and  the  Palatinate.  For  the  greatness  and  deeds  of  Gustavus  Adolphus 
we  must  refer  to  the  numberless  lives  and  accounts  of  him.  The  best  are 
named  in  the  bibliog.  Hausser,  II,  152  sqq„  is  a  good  brief  discussion  of 
the  man,  his  character,  career,  tactics,  etc.  Cf.  Gindely,  II,  Appendix. 
Grotius's  de  iure  belli  ac  pacis  appeared  in  1625  and  Gustavus  was  wont 
to  carry  it  with  him  and  sleep  with  it  for  pillow.  On  his  use  of  artillery, 
'  Artillery,'  in  Encyc.  Brit. 

§  16    The  Swedish  Phases 

Gardiner,  ch.  viii,  ix.     Gindely,  II,  iii-ix,  xi.     Hausser,  pt.  ix.     Tuttle,  Prussia, 
ch.  iv.    Hurter,  IVallensiein's  4  letzte  Lebensjahre. 

I  The  instant  the  two  northern  electors,  so  dilatory, 
join  him,  Gustavus  rushes  against  Tilly,  whom  he 
totally  defeats  at  Breitenfeld,  the  '  Naseby  of  Germany,' 
163 1.  Then,  while  the  Saxons  march  on  Vienna,  he 
sweeps  Franconia,  the  Palatinate  and  the  great  ecclesi- 
astical  princedoms,1  and   having   separated    Spaniards 


THE  THIRTY  YEARS  WAR  333 

from  imperialists,  returns  against  the  latter,  opens 
Bavaria  by  seizing  Donauworth,  forces  the  Lech  in  a 
battle 2  where  the  great  Tilly  is  mortally  wounded,  and 
enters  Munich  in  April,  1632.  Ferdinand,  trembling 
in  expectation  of  the  Swedes  and  Saxons  at  Vienna, 
restores  Waldstein,  making  him  virtually  dictator  of  the 
empire.  Hastily  collecting  an  army  Waldstein  chases 
the  Saxons  from  Bohemia,  then  volts  to  strike  Gustavus. 
The  two  terrible  chiefs  face  each  other  six  weeks  at 
Niirnberg,  when  Waldstein  retreats  to  Saxony,  the 
Swede  close  behind.  In  the  battle  of  Liitzen,  1632, 
Gustavus  Adolphus  falls?  Pappenheim  too,  Waldstein' s 
foremost  lieutenant,  yet  victory  declares  for  the  Swedes, 
commanded  by  Bernhard  of  Weimar.  2  Dissensions 
between  the  Swedes  and  the  Germans4  render  the  vic- 
tory useless  and  the  imperialists  assume  the  offensive. 
The  Swedish  Chancellor  Oxenstierna,  now  the  political 
head  of  the  protestants,  is  disliked  by  Bernhard,  the 
greatest  remaining  general.  Notwithstanding  the  loss 
of  Waldstein,5  whom  through  well-grounded  jealousy 
Ferdinand  lets  be  assassinated,  the  imperialists  win  the 
terrible  battle  of  Nordlingen,6  1634,  which  divides  the 
Swedes,  discourages  the  Germans  and  reinstates  the 
catholics  in  all  the  South.  The  Peace  of  Prag,7  1635, 
gives  up  the  Edict  of  Restitution  though  only  for  the 
Lutherans  and  in  the  North,  reconciles  Saxony  and 
Brandenburg  to  the  emperor  and  turns  them  against 
the  Swedes.  The  protestants  are  now  again  disunited 
and  without  heart,  their  cause  once  more  at  nadir.  At 
this  point  the  war  quite  loses  its  confessional  and 
religious  character  and  is  henceforth  political,  a  mere 


334  THE   THIRTY   YEARS     WAR 

continuation  of  the  eternal  feud  between  France  and 
Austria. 

1  Called '  Priests'  Lane,'  including  Wiirzburg,  Bamberg,  Fulda,  Cologne, 
Trier,  Mainz,  Worms,  Speyer. 

2  It  was  at  Rain,  where  the  Lech  joins  the  Danube.  Tilly  was  73 
years  old. 

8  His  last  words,  '  the  world  for  others.'  For  this  battle,  Gardiner,  ch. 
viii,  sec.  6.  See  also  in  Herm.  Merivale's  Historical  Studies,  II.  Wald- 
stein  had  about  18,000  men  to  Gustavus's  20,000. 

4  On  this  phase  of  the  war,  Droysen,  Bernhard  von  Weimar,  passim. 
In  1633  Sweden  formed  the  League  of  Heilbronn  with  the  circles  of 
Swabia,  Franconia,  Upper  and  Lower  Rhine.  Hausser,  II,  208,  Gardi- 
ner, 167. 

6  On  Waldstein,  besides  the  works  named  in  the  bibliog.,  see  Gardiner, 
ch.  ix;  Winter,  in  Nord  u.  Siid,  Mch.,  1883,  on  W.'s  Fall;  Hausser,  II, 
213.  As  to  his  guilt,  see  Gindely,  Int.  Old  writers  think  him  a  traitor. 
So  Schiller,  although  he  could  wish  that  the  proofs  were  stronger.  Forster 
accounts  him  innocent,  unless  just  at  the  end  when  he  thought  the  em- 
peror about  to  remove  him.  Dr.  Hallwich,  the  most  voluminous  writer 
on  the  subject,  holds  the  same  view.  Dr.  Schebeck  clears  him  entirely. 
Ranke  thinks  him  technically  guilty,  yet  honest  in  his  effort  to  bring  catho- 
lics and  protestants  together.  Gindely  is  impressed  that  the  great  leader 
was  guilty,  but  bids  us  wait  till  he  has  published  his  material. 

6  Gardiner,  ch.  ix,  sec.  5,  Droysen,  Bernhard  v.  Weimar,  bk.  iv.  The 
killed  amounted  to  12,000,  prisoners,  among  them  General  Horn,  to  600a 
The  emperor's  son,  Ferdinand,  subsequently  Ferdinand  III,  commanded 
the  imperialists.  Defeated,  the  protestant  army  divided,  Bernhard  retreat- 
ing to  the  Rhine,  the  Swedes  to  Pomerania. 

7  This  renewed  the  status  quo  of  1627,  thus  saving  to  protestantism 
most  of  the  northern  bishoprics  but  leaving  Halberstadt,  the  Palatinate 
and  the  lands  included  in  the  League  of  Heilbronn  [n.  4]  in  catholic 
hands.  Brandenburg,  coolly  and  nominally  Calvinistic,  was  to  be  treated 
as  Lutheran. 


THE   THIRTY   YEARS*    WAR  335 

§  iy    The  Peace  of  Westphalia 

Gardiner,  chaps,  x,  xi.    Gindely,  II,  x.    Bryce,  xix.    Perkins,  as  in  bibliog.    Ranke, 
Civil  W.  and  Monarchy  in  Fr.,  vol.  i.     Tuttle,  Prussia,  ch.  iv. 

The  remainder  of  the  war,  its  French  phase,1  is  replete 
with  interest  but  as  political  less  within  our  theme. 
Richelieu's  policy,  fully  successful,  was  in  general  to 
humble  Hapsburg,  in  particular  to  extend  France  to  the 
Rhine  and  obstruct  Spain's  road 2  to  the  Netherlands. 
As  means  to  these  ends  he  would  (i)  outwit  Oxen- 
stierna,  the  able  guardian  of  Sweden's  interests,  (2) 
support  and  use  the  great  German  and  Swedish  war- 
riors, yet  (3)  prevent  any  of  these  from  becoming  so 
powerful  as  to  crush  the  emperor  or  oppose  France. 
Both  parties  seeing  themselves  becoming  mere  tools  for 
building  France,  thought  of  peace.  With  this  motive 
wrought  the  indescribable  poverty  and  distress  of  every 
kind  induced  by  the  war.3  The  ecclesiastical  provisions 
of  the  Peace  (1)  confirmed  the  agreement  of  Augsburg 
including  the  cuius  regio  clause,  except  that  save  under 
the  Austrian  crown  alone  personal  confession  and  house 
worship  were  to  be  free,  (2)  placed  Calvinists  on  the 
same  footing 4  with  the  other  two  confessions,  and  (3) 
fixed  as  protestant  all  principalities  and  ecclesiastical 
property  that  had  been  so  on  January  1,  1624,  except 
in  the  Palatinate,  where  161 8  was  to  be  the  normal 
year.  Its  political  provisions  involved  (1)  the  immense 
enlargement  of  France,5  (2)  indemnity  in  imperial  money 
and  territory  to  Sweden,6  (3)  the  de  hire  severance  of 
the  United  Netherlands  and  Switzerland  from  the  em- 
pire and  of  the  Netherlands  also  from  Spain,  (4)  the 
extension  of  several  German  principalities,  mainly  at 


336  THE  THIRTY  YEARS'   WAR 

the  church's  expense,  (5)  the  confirmation  to  Bavaria 
of  the  Upper  Palatinate  with  the  old  electorship,  a  new, 
eighth,  electorship  being  created  for  the  Lower,  (6) 
sovereignty  for  all  Fiirsten,  involving  the  right  to  con- 
clude treaties  with  each  other  and  with  foreign  powers, 
though  not  against  the  empire,  and  (7)  the  duty  of 
France  and  Sweden  as  guarantors.7 

1  The  elector  of  Trier  having  placed  himself  under  France's  protection, 
his  lands  are  seized  by  Spain,  to  aid  whom  Piccolomini,  in  1636,  pierces 
Picardy  with  18,000  men  and  threatens  Paris,  even  Richelieu  proposing 
to  fall  back  upon  the  Loire.  But  the  French  rally,  and  with  Bernhard's 
aid  beat  back  both  Spaniards  and  imperialists.  In  1637  the  French  fleet 
destroys  a  Spanish  and  ravages  the  coasts  of  Naples  and  Sicily.  But  the 
main  victory  of  this  year,  the  turning-point  in  this  phase  of  the  war,  was 
Bernhard's  at  Rheinfeld,  where  he  captures  Worth,  the  imperialist  gen- 
eral, and  carries  Old  Breisach  by  assault.  On  his  death,  soon  after,  his 
troops  come  under  French  pay  and  command.  In  1640  France  wrests 
Artois  and  Arras  from  the  catholic  Netherlands,  in  '4i-'2  ejects  the  Span- 
iards from  Savoy,  invades  Catalonia,  takes  Perpignan  and  makes  Rous- 
sillon  French,  as  it  has  since  remained.  Meantime  Baner,  a  second  Gus- 
tavus,  reenforced  from  Sweden,  sets  forth  from  Pomerania,  defeats  the 
imperialists  at  Wittstock  in  '36,  at  Chemnitz  in  '39,  penetrates  Bohemia 
and  with  Guebriant's  aid  takes  Regensburg  in  '41,  diet  and  all,  Ferdinand 
III  [Ferd.  II  d.  in  '37]  hardly  escaping.  Baner  dies,  but  the  paralytic, 
Torstenson,  surprises  Europe  by  his  rapid  and  brilliant  victories  at  Glogau, 
Schweidnitz  and  Breitenfeld  in  1642,  as  does  Guebriant  by  his  at  Wolfen- 
biittel  in  '41  and  Kempten  in  '42.  In  France,  Conde  begins  his  great  list 
of  victories  by  defeating  the  Spaniards  at  Rocroi  in  '43,  driving  them  from 
the  land,  and  setting  free  French  troops  under  Turenne  to  aid  Guebriant 
in  So.  Germany.  Conde  and  Turenne  triumph  over  Mercy  at  Freiburg  in 
Breisgau,  '44,  and  take  Philipsburg,  Worms  and  Mainz,  clearing  the 
Rhine  of  imperialists.  In  this  same  year  '44,  Torstenson,  who  had  re- 
treated from  Moravia  before  Gallas,  volts,  smites  Gallas  at  Juterbogk  in 
Brandenburg,  another  imperial  army  at  Jankowitz,  '45,  besieges  Briinn, 
menaces  Vienna,  and  bids  Turenne  meet  him  on  the  Danube.  The  latter 
is  beaten  by  Mercy  at  Marienthal,  '45,  but  with  Conde's  aid  wins,  same 
year,  the  second  battle  of  Nordlingen,  after  which,  uniting  with  Wrangel, 


THE  THIRTY  YEARS  WAR  337 

Torstenson's  successor,  winning  victory  upon  victory,  he  sweeps  Bavaria 
and  moves  upon  Vienna. 

2  Which  had  always  lain  through  the  Rhone  and  Rhine  valleys,  in 
Spanish  or  Austrian  hands. 

3  Gindely,  vol.  ii,  ch.  xi,  Weber,  II,  211  sq.,  Hausser,  II,  276  sq.  Ger- 
many is  said  to  have  lost  in  this  war  two-thirds  its  population.  The  inhab- 
itants of  Augsburg  fell  from  90,000  to  6000.  With  many  northern  towns 
it  fared  worse  still.  Dudik  computed  that  the  war  destroyed  1976  castles, 
1629  towns  and  18,310  villages.  German  manufactures  and  commerce, 
till  now  extraordinarily  prosperous  since  the  Reformation,  this  war  so 
nearly  annihilated  that  they  have  never  recovered.  The  Hanseatic  League 
[§  4,  n.  1]  soon  embraced  Liibeck,  Hamburg  and  Bremen  alone,  besides 
which  only  Frankfort  and  Leipzig  had  much  trade.  The  roads  of  com- 
merce were  unsafe.  Money  was  scarce.  The  wealthy  had  removed  to 
other  lands,  as  the  Augsburg  merchant  princes,  Fugger  and  Welser,  to 
Antwerp,  and  when  quiet  returned  business  had  established  its  centres 
abroad.  Destruction  of  property  was  worse  even  than  that  of  life.  Schiller, 
in  Wallenstein's  Lager,  gives  a  good  picture  of  the  barbarism  prevalent  in 
the  army.  Ferdinand  III  was  more  inclined  to  peace  with  protestants 
than  was  his  father.  He  had  long  been  ready  to  concede  all  that  they 
wanted  but  refused  French  and  Swedish  intervention.  The  Swedish  vic- 
tory at  Prag  [the  war  ending  exactly  where  it  began]  decided  him.  Nego- 
tiations were  proposed  in  1 641,  opened  in  '43.  The  catholic  plenipoten- 
tiaries met  at  Miinster,  the  protestant  at  Osnabriick,  both  in  Westphalia. 
Encouraged  by  the  war  of  the  Fronde  in  France  Spain  refuses  to  accede 
to  this  peace  till  1657.     The  other  states  sign,  Oct.  24,  1648. 

*  Not  strictly,  since  the  emperor,  for  aught  that  appeared  in  the  instru- 
ment, must  still  always  be  a  catholic.     Treitschke,  p.  9. 

6  See  §  19. 

6  5,000,000  Thaler,  and  the  lands  about  the  Oder,  Weser  and  Elbe 
mouths,  including  hither  and  most  of  farther  Pomerania,  Stettin  and  its 
district,  Riigen,  Wismar,  and  the  secularized  bishoprics  of  Bremen  and 
Werden.  All  these  possessions  being  still  in  the  empire,  Sweden  was  to 
have  on  their  account  three  voices  in  the  diet.     Weber,  II,  209  sq. 

'  Wat  kostet  unter  Fried'?    O,  wie  viel  Zeit  und  jfahre! 
Wat  kostet  unter  Fried' ?    O,  wie  viel  Graue  Haarel 
Wat  kottet  unter  Fried  *f    O,  wie  viel  Strome  Blut! 
Wat  kottet  unter  Fried'?    O,  wie  viel  Tonnen  Gut! 
Ergotzt  er  auch  dafur  und  lohnt  so  viel  Veroden? 
Ja.  —  Wem?    Frag'  Echo  drum.  —  Wem  meint  tie  wohl?  — 
[Echo:]    Den  Schwedtn' 


338  THE   THIRTY   YEARS'   WAR 

7  The  Westphalia  congress  was  the  file  leader  of  all  the  subsequent 
European  congresses.  Nothing  really  like  it  had  ever  occurred  before 
since  the  Amphictyonic  Council.  It  introduced  into  Europe  the  general 
political  system  which  still  prevails.  With  it,  too,  the  present  great  body 
of  positive  international  law  began  its  growth.  Grotius  had  published  in 
1622,  and  the  congress  as  it  were  enacted  his  book  into  an  international 
statute.  From  this  congress,  further,  date  stated  diplomatic  relations, 
legations,  embassies,  etc.,  between  governments.  It  is  a  massive  ganglion 
in  the  nerve-system  of  history. 


§  18  Germany  after  the  Peace 

Treitsckke,  D.  Gesch.  im  XIX  Jahrh.,  I,  i.    Hanser,  Deutschland  nack  dent  30- 
jakrigen  Kr.    Bryce,  xix.     Gardiner,  ch.  xi.    Lewi's,  chaps,  xviii,  xix. 

Thus  feudalism  had  ripened  its  fruit.1  The  emperor 
still  invested  his  vassals  in  old  fashion,  sitting  and  cov- 
ered, still  posed  as  supreme  judge.  The  herald  continued 
at  coronations  to  brandish  the  imperial  sword  toward 
each  of  the  four  winds  as  a  sign  that  all  Christendom 
obeyed  the  double  eagle,  to  number  Lombardy  and  Tus- 
cany as  imperial  fiefs,  to  speak  of  chancellors  for  Ger- 
many, Italy  and  Burgundy,  and  at  diets  to  summon  the 
estates  of  Nomeny,  Bisance  and  other  forgotten  lands  to 
vote.  But  these  were  now  the  most  idle  of  forms.  Unity 
and  power  gone,  the  empire  was  hardly  even  a  confed- 
eracy, no  common  treasury,  no  means  of  coercion.  Diet 2 
was  as  helpless  as  emperor,  its  feeble  deeds  like  his, 
subject  to  dictation  by  foreign  courts.  The  individual 
states  alone  retained  energy,  which  however,  they  dis- 
played in  petty 3  instead  of  patriotic  ways.  Few  were 
the  rulers  who  did  not  either  ignore  or  fatally  misunder- 
stand public  interests.  Ministers  of  Fiirsten  took  pen- 
sions from  abroad.  Each  of  the  329  separate  domains 
had  its  own  absolute  monarch  4  with  his  separate  court, 


THE  THIRTY  YEARS  WAR  339 

army,  coinage  and  taxes.  German  national  feeling  died 
out.5  Austria,  with  which  imperial  interests  and  ideas 
were  bound  up,  grew  constantly  less  German  as  its 
power  in  and  by  itself  increased.  Other  non-German 
states,  Denmark,  Sweden,  England,  Poland  and  France, 
were  mixed  up  with  imperial  affairs.  French  influence, 
speech  and  letters  displaced  Spanish  and  for  long  no 
fine  literature  was  composed  in  German.  German  his- 
tory from  the  Peace  of  Westphalia  to  the  French  Rev- 
olution presents  barely  a  single  grand  character,  not 
one  noble  enterprise. 

1  '  In  France  the  feudal  head  absorbed  all  the  powers  of  the  state  and 
left  to  the  aristocracy  only  a  few  privileges,  odious  indeed  but  politically 
worthless.  In  England  the  mediaeval  system  expanded  into  a  constitu- 
tional monarchy,  where  the  oligarchy  was  still  strong  but  the  commons 
had  won  the  full  recognition  of  equal  civil  rights.  In  Germany  everything 
was  taken  from  the  sovereign  and  nothing  given  to  the  people  '  [Bryce]. 
Cf.  Chaps.  V,  §  10,  VI,  §  20,  n.  4. 

2  Full  diet  mustered  240  votes,  of  which  temporal  Fiirsten  had  101, 
ecclesiastical  72,  free  cities  61,  counts  and  Freiherren  together  4,  the  united 
prelates  not  Fiirsten  2.  Members  of  the  diet  [aside  from  the  delegates 
of  cities]  were  not  necessarily  immediate  vassals  of  the  emperor  though 
most  of  them  held  this  relation.  The  Standschaft  might  belong  to  a  dig- 
nitary possessing  no  land  at  all.  Till  the  17th  century  the  emperor's  word 
was  enough  to  invest  such  a  one  with  it.  See  Schulte,  312  sq.  Many 
free  cities  now  lost  their  independence  and  their  importance. 

3  This  littleness  took  effect  in  every  department  of  life  and  thought. 
The  free  and  creative  spirit  which  ruled  literature  and  theology  while 
Luther  and  Melancthon  were  on  high  gave  way  to  dogmatism  and  servile 
reverence  for  authority  and  for  the  letter  which  killeth.  Orthodoxy  be- 
came a  greater  word  than  truth.  The  reaction  was  an  equally  irrational 
'rationalism.'  Culture  went  back  five  centuries.  Art  perished  as  if  Gen- 
seric  or  Attila  had  marched  through  the  land.  '  In  all  ranks  life  was 
meaner,  poorer,  harder  than  it  had  been  at  the  beginning  of  the  century ' 
[Gardiner]. 

4  The  '  estates '-legislatures  everywhere  renounced  function  or  else  dis- 
appeared entirely.     About  57,600  sq.  miles  of  German  land  belonged  to 


340  THE   THIRTY   YEARS     WAR 

states  of  which  no  one  embraced  more  than  2080.  Popular  wit  ridiculed 
the  stocking-knitting  soldiery  of  the  Cologne  state,  as  well  as  the  grim 
warriors  of  the  bishop  of  Hildesheim,  whose  hats  bore  the  legend,  '  Grant 
peace,  O  Lord,  in  our  days  '  [Treitschke]. 

6  The  idea  of  nationality  was  linked  with  that  of  the  empire,  now  uni- 
versally regarded  an  Austrian  affair,  and  between  Austria  and  Germany 
proper  no  sympathy  could  exist.  Yet  Austria  by  its  own  extraordinary 
power  and  by  the  aid  of  the  ecclesiastical  principalities,  especially  Mainz, 
never  found  it  difficult  to  retain  the  hegemony.  Frederic  the  Great  boasted 
that  he  ignored  German  and  could  write  French  as  well  as  Voltaire. 

§  19    Political  Outcome  for  France 

Freer,  Reign  of  Henry  IV.    Kitchin,  bk.  iv.    Perkins,  and  Heeren,  as  in  bibliog. 
Bryce,  xix.     Lodge,  Mod.  Europe,  ch.  xi. 

The  Thirty  Years'  War  was  as  epochal  in  French  as 
in  German  political  history  but  in  a  different  way. 
While  it  annihilated  German  national  unity  and  power 
it  cemented  the  French  nation  more  firmly  and  made 
France  supreme  in  Europe.1  To  France's  struggle  of 
king  with  feudalism  succeeded  that  between  catholic 
and  protestant.  The  Reformation  here,  allying  itself 
mostly  with  nobles,2  the  learned  and  the  wealthy,  never 
became  popular  as  in  Germany.  Hence,  powerful  as  it 
for  a  long  time  was,  it  was  never  enough  so  to  triumph. 
Yet  it  availed  to  bring  a  long  succession  of  civil  wars, 
with  their  horrid  train  of  anarchy,  poverty  and  oblivion 
of  national  interests,  evils  upon  which  Spain  2  and  Eng- 
land flourished.  Efficient  relief  first  came  from  the 
accession,  character  and  sagacity  of  Henry  IV,  who 
through  his  hold  on  both  parties  and  by  chasing  the 
Spaniards  from  the  land,  greatly  drew  the  nation 
together.  Civil  wars  ceased,  economic  prosperity  re- 
turned, Henry  could  meditate  a  European  league3 
against  the  Hapsburgs  with  France  its  centre.      Seiz- 


THE   THIRTY   YEARS     WAR  34 1 

ing,  partly  creating,  this  war  for  opportunity,  Richelieu 
took  up  Henry's  plan  and  work,  with  the  advantage 
that  as  cardinal  he  could  not  be  suspected  of  sympathy 
with  protestants,  while  as  aiding  their  cause  abroad  he 
could  more  freely  modify  those  privileges  of  theirs  under 
the  Edict  of  Nantes 4  which  hindered  national  solidity 
and  strength.  So  through  Richelieu's  adroitness  the 
war  yielded  France  (i)  more  decided  courage,  ambition 
and  internal  consolidation,  (2)  territory :  Pignerol  and 
other  points  in  Savoy,  full  sovereignty  5  over  Metz,  Toul, 
Verdun,  and  Alsace  Upper  and  Lower6  with  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  free  cities  therein,  Breisach  beyond 
the  Rhine  and  the  right  to  garrison  Philipsburg,  (3) 
practical  preponderance  over  Austria  in  the  empire 
itself,  through  its  delegation 7  in  the  diet,  its  guarantor- 
ship  of  the  Peace  and  its  frequent  calls  to  mediate 
between  German  states.  It  is  thus  clear  that  the  power 
at  home  and  in  Europe  of  Louis  XIV's  monarchy  had 
its  springs  in  Henry  IV,  Richelieu  and  the  Thirty 
Years'  War. 

1  So  that  from  this  time  France  instead  of  Hapsburg  was  the  power 
continually  feared  as  endangering  the  European  balance.     Ch.  X,  §  3. 

2  In  France  so  early  as  1561  there  were  2000  Huguenot  churches. 
Scaliger,  Casaubon  and  the  Stephani  were  protestant  scholars.  Besides 
Antoine,  K'g  of  Navarre,  and  his  son  Henry  IV  of  France,  Conde  and 
Coligny  were  among  the  protestant  leaders.  Political  disaffection  would 
often  drive  great  men  into  the  protestant  ranks,  and  such  infected  to  some 
extent  the  whole  communion  with  their  restlessness  and  turbulence.  It 
was  Richelieu's  policy  to  buy  up  the  Huguenot  chiefs  with  titles  and  mili- 
tary positions,  so  as  to  unite  France. 

8  See  Baird's  Huguenots  and  Henry  of  Navarre,  James's  Henry  IV, 
Freer  as  above,  and  Motley's  works. 
4  See  §  6,  n.  7. 
'  See  next  §. 


342  THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR 

'  Hitherto,  though  under  French  control  since  in  1552  Henry  II  seized 
them  in  the  Smalcaldic  war  [Ch.  VIII,  §  19],  these  bishoprics  had  recog- 
nized the  sovereignty  of  the  empire.  The  emperor  had  invested  their 
Furst-bishops,  imperial  eagles  had  been  struck  at  Metz,  and  cases  had 
been  appealed  from  their  courts  to  the  imperial  chamber. 

7  How  these  districts  came  into  Austria's  hands,  see  Ch.  VI,  §  20,  n.  2, 
and  Ch.  VIII,  §  17,  last  n.  The  free  cities  were  Hagenau,  Kolmar. 
Schlettstadt,  Weissenburg,  Landau,  Kaisersberg,  Obernheim,  Rossheim, 
Munster  and  Thiiringheim.  They  were  still  to  remain  free  and  to  retain 
a  relation  to  the  empire,  yet  not  exactly  as  fiefs  [n.  8].  In  a  word,  only 
what  was  Austria's  now  passed  to  France.  Strassburg  and  the  district 
just  around  it  remained  in  the  empire  till  seized,  wholly  without  warrant, 
by  Louis  XIV  in  1681.  The  duchy  of  Lorraine,  except  the  now  isolated 
French  lands  of  Metz,  Toul  and  Verdun,  remained  imperial  till  1766.  On 
this  cf.  Freeman's  Atlas,  plates  xxvi,  xxvii,  xxxiii.  The  Breisach  ceded 
was  Old  Breisach,  in  southern  Baden.    Philipsburg  was  in  northern  Baden. 

8  Ambassadors  rather  than  members  in  ordinary.  France  did  not  ac- 
knowledge the  vassal-relation  to  the  empire  for  any  part  of  the  territory 
now  acquired,  and  the  language  of  §  73  in  the  Treaty  all  but  cedes  full 
sovereignty  over  the  10  cities  as  well  as  over  the  rest. 


§  20    Religious  Outcome 

Lewis,  Bryce,  and  Gardiner  as  at  §  17.    Lane,  and  Baird  as  in  bibliog. 
All  the  Histories  of  Louis  XIV  and  his  Times. 

On  the  other  hand  the  war  did  much  less  *or  France 
than  for  Germany  toward  solving  the  great  European 
question  of  the  century,  how  far  religious  liberty  is  con- 
sistent with  the  integrity  of  states.  Since  the  idea  of 
an  establishment  of  religion  was  then  universal,  hardly 1 
any  one  yet  conceiving  the  possibility  of  a  solid  govern- 
ment based  on  confessional  neutrality,  desire  for  national 
unity  could  not  but  antagonize  religious  toleration.  It 
was  felt  that  innovators  in  religious  belief  must  of  neces- 
sity be  traitors.  Germany  had  done  the  utmost  that 
the  ideas  of  the  age  could  brook,  in  fixing  the  geograph- 


THE   THIRTY    YEARS'   WAR  343 

ical  boundaries  of  the  warring  faiths,  with  the  right  of 
aggressive  dissenters  to  migrate.  Within  the  princi- 
pality even  in  Germany  there  was  nothing  worthy  the 
name  of  religious  freedom.  The  Edict  of  Nantes,2 
1598,  which  only  enlarged  and  confirmed  Henry  Ill's 
agreement  of  1576,  proceeded  upon  the  same  idea  as  the 
Peaces  of  Augsburg  and  Westphalia,  not  general  im- 
munity to  religious  dissent  but  protestant  independence 
in  certain  fixed  localities.  Calvinism,  intensely  political 
always,  scarcely  more  tolerant  than  its  foe,  formed  a 
France  within  France.  Such  imperia  in  imperioz  were 
certain  not  to  be  permanently  tolerated  in  this  land, 
where  the  spirit  of  nationality 4  was  so  much  mightier 
than  beyond  the  Rhine.  Not  pure  cruelty  or  bigotry 
therefore,  but  in  part  ideas  of  political  policy  dictated 
those  heinous  measures  of  Louis  XIV  against  the 
Huguenots,  which  culminated  in  the  revocation  of  the 
Edict  of  Nantes,  1685.  But  by  this  course,  France, 
like  Germany  though  in  a  different  direction,  effected 
merely  a  change  of  evils,  buying  political  unity  at  the 
cost  of  free  thought  and  confession  —  ultimately  the 
disastrous  effects  were  political  too,  reaching  the  very 
foundations  of  the  state  —  while  Germany  received  her 
measure  of  religious  liberty  by  diminishing  her  already 
too  little  political  strength  and  centralization. 

1  John  Ernest  of  Saxe- Weimar  was  the  first  German  to  suggest  the 
quieting  of  the  fatherland  by  proclaiming  universal  toleration.  Elector 
George  William  of  Brandenburg  in  1631  expressed  the  wish  that  'at  least 
the  private  exercise  of  religion  '  should  be  free  to  all.  The  turn  of  the 
phrase  indicates  that  he  was  meditating  more.  1631  was  the  year  of 
Roger  Williams's  settlement  in  Salem,  the  German  elector's  thought  doubt- 
less already  stirring  in  his  mind,  as  in  Vane's,  and  in  Lord  Baltimore's, 
who  wrought  it  into  Maryland's  constitution  of  1639.    Gindely,  II,  105  and 


344  THE   THIRTY    YEARS     WAR 

n.,  also  n.  2,  below.  In  Roger  Williams  the  idea  took  in  a  few  years  the 
larger  and  finer  form  of  an  out  and  out  non-confessional  state. 

2  By  this,  nobles  possessing  high  justice  [Ch.  VI,  §  16,  n.  i]  had  full 
liberty  of  worship.  So  in  given  cities  and  places  had  all  citizens,  but  not 
in  episcopal  cities,  in  Paris  or  within  a  circle  of  five  miles  around,  or  at  the 
king's  court.  Calvinists  could  hold  public  office,  even  sit  in  the  Parlia- 
ments of  Paris,  Toulouse,  Grenoble  and  Bordeaux.  The  edict  put  in  effect, 
so  far,  the  principle  of  toleration  which  chancellor  l'Hopital,  i505-'73, 
had  announced,  —  in  vain  so  far  as  concerned  his  time.  But  men  could 
not  forget  it.  It  not  only  blessed  France  while  the  edict  prevailed  but 
outlived  the  revocation,  grew,  and  inspired  the  writings  of  the  i8th  cen- 
tury and  the  beneficent  acts  of  the  French  Revolution. 

8  Huguenots  had  their  own  institutions  of  learning  and  political  assem- 
blies, their  towns  special  protestant  garrisons,  not  of  royal  troops.  They 
were  suspected  of  aiming  at  entire  independence  from  France.  Their 
strength  and  strongholds  were  in  Languedoc,  making  catholics  fear  a  new 
Albigensian  revolt. 

4  This  is  why  the  sieges  of  Rochelle  and  Stralsund  terminated  so  differ- 
ently, the  French  city  succumbing,  the  German  successfully  defying  the 
central  power.  Rochelle  made  a  desperate  defence,  the  inhabitants 
being  reduced  to  a  diet  of  skins  and  boiled  parchments.  The  aged 
duchess  of  Rohan  lived  three  months  on  horseflesh.  More  than  half  the 
population  died,  only  154  men-at-arms  remaining.  With  this  city  fell  the 
Huguenot  power.  Yet  neither  Richelieu  nor  Mazarin  thought  of  revoking 
the  edict  of  Nantes,  a  criminal  blunder  reserved  for  Louis  XIV,  who  had 
Philip  IPs  blood  in  his  veins.  '  When  your  Majesty  called  me  to  his 
councils  I  can  truly  say  that  the  Huguenots  divided  the  state  with  you. 
The  nobles  conducted  themselves  as  if  they  were  not  subjects,  and  the 
governors  of  provinces  as  if  they  were  independent  sovereigns.  Foreign 
alliances  were  despised,  private  interests  preferred  to  public,  and  the  dig- 
nity of  your  Majesty  so  abased  that  it  could  hardly  be  recognized.  I 
promised  your  Majesty  to  use  all  my  industry  and  power  to  ruin  the 
Huguenot  party,  lower  the  pride  of  the  nobles,  lead  all  subjects  to  their 
duty  and  to  restore  the  country's  name  among  foreign  nations.' — Riche- 
lieu's Ttttament  politique,  pt,  i,  ch.  i. 


SELECT  BIBLIOGRAPHY  TO   CHAPTER  X 

Morris,  Fr.  Revolution  [Ep.  of  H. :  App.  to  Am.  ed.  has  very  fine 
bibliog.].  Ducoudray,  Hist,  de  Fr.,  et  h.  contemporaine.*  Student's 
France,  bk.  vii.  Adams,  Democracy  and  Mon.  in  Fr.**  Harrison, 
Histories  of  the  Fr.  Rev.**  [No.  Am.  Rev.,  1883,  vol.  137].  v.  Sybel, 
Fr.  Rev.,*  3  v.  Taine,  Ancient  Regime;**  Revolution,**  3  V.  Stephens, 
Fr.  Rev.,**  [1  v.  out].  Blanc,  Hist,  de  la  Rev.  Francaise,  12  v.  Thiers, 
do.,  10  v.  [tr.  in  2].  Mignet,**  do.,  2  v.  [Bohn,  1  v. :  best  single  fairly  full 
account].  Michelet,  do.,  9  v.  [also  in  Bohn];  Precis  de  la  Rev.  [best 
brief  account  to  Robespierre's  d.].  Van  Laun,  Fr.  Revolutionary  Epoch,** 
2  v.  Burke,  Reflections  on  the  Fr.  Rev.  Lecky,  England  in  the  XVIIIth 
Cent.  [6  v.  out],  vol.  v.  Alison,  H.  of  Europe,  First  Series,  1789-1815 
[there  is  an  abridge't].  Biedermann,  Deutschland  im  XVIIIten  Jahrh. 
[vol.  iv,  1882].  Carlyle,  Fr.  Rev.  Smyth,  Lect.  on  do.  Hausser,  Gesch. 
d.fr.  Rev*  Niebuhr,  Gesch.  d.  Zeitallers  d.  Rev.  Lamartine,  Giron- 
dists [in  Bohn],  3  v.  Fyffe,  Mod.  Europe,  de  Tocqueville,  L'ancien 
regime  et  la  Riv.  Kitchin,  Fr.,  vol.  hi.  Gardiner,  Fr.  Rev.  [Ep.  of 
Mod.  H.].  Mill,  Observations  on  the  Fr.  Rev.  [in  Dissertations,  vol.  i]. 
Janet,  Philosophic  de  la  Rev.  francaise.  v.  Noorden,  Europdische  Gesch. 
im  XVIIIten  Jahrh.,  3  v.  Schlosser,  H.  of  the  XVIIIth  Century,  etc., 
8  v.  Martin,  Fr.  depuis  1789  jusqu'a  nos  jours,**,  3  v.  Guizot,  Civ. 
in  Europe,  xiv.  v.  Raumer,  Gesch.  Frankreichs  von.  d.  fr.  Rev.,  1740- 
'95.  Oncken,  Zeitalter  d.  Rev.,  d.  Kaissereichs  u.  d.  Befreiungskriege,  I. 
v.  Treitschke,  Aufsaetze,  vol.  iii.  Laurent,  Droit  des  gens,  vols,  xiii  and 
xiv.  Barruel,  Memoirs  of  Jacobinism,  4  v.  Croker,  Fr.  Rev.  Baum- 
garten,  Gesch.  Spaniens,  3  v.  Seeley,  L.  and  Times  of  Stein,  3  v.  Tol- 
stoi, War  and  Peace.**  Dickens,  Tale  of  Two  Cities.  Weir,  Hist'l 
Basis  of  Mod.  Europe, 


CHAPTER   X 

THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION 


The  Newest  Political  History 

Maine,  Popular  Government.     Bancroft,  U.  S.,  vol.  vi  [last  ed.],  472  sqq.     Contemp. 
Rev.,  Nov.,  1884,  650  sqq.     Harrison,  as  in  bibliog.     Bryce,  435  sqq. 

The  political  history  of  the  last  hundred  years  betrays 
four  leading  tendencies :  i  A  constitutional.  Abso- 
lutism, which  till  the  American  Revolution *  was  univer- 
sal and  supreme,  has  gradually  given  way,  no  longer 
existing  in  any  state  of  first  rank.  Monarchy  has  been 
dispensed  with  by  many  peoples  even  as  to  its  form, 
others  retain  its  form  only,  in  the  rest  its  old  power 
is  gone.  Civilized  lands  are  now  ruled  in  unprece- 
dented measure  for  the  people  as  well  as  more  and  more 
by  the  people.  Serfs  and  slaves  2  have  been  freed,  suf- 
frage enormously  extended.  2  A  centralizing.3  This 
movement  is  less  general  than  the  above,  being  mainly 
confined  to  the  United  States,  Germany  and  Italy, 
though  manifested  also  in  the  foreign  conquests  of 
England,  France  and  Chili,  but  scarcely  less  rational  or 
beneficial,  since  modern  means  of  communication  im- 
mensely facilitate  the  unifying  of  large  and  widely 
separated  bodies  of  men.  3  A  race-national.  This, 
which,  observe,  in  some  cases  antagonizes4  the  last, 
appears  in  the  new  prominence  assumed  by  the  element 


348  THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

of  blood-relationship  in  determining  the  boundaries  of 
states.  The  nation  political  inclines  more  to  coincide 
with  the  nation  as  thing  of  race.  Here  too,  next  after 
Ireland,  Germany  and  Italy  best  illustrate,  and  this  not 
only  by  their  recent  but  also  by  their  prospective  his- 
tory. The  German  empire  bids  fair  in  the  end  to  em- 
brace German  Austria,  as  Italy  Italian,  Elsass-Lothrin- 
gen  strives5  to  be  French  again.  4  A  non-confes- 
sional.5 Men  have  been  coming  to  view  religion  more 
clearly  as  separable  from  politics,  to  see  that  various 
religious  faiths  can  dwell  harmoniously  under  the  same 
constitution.  Witness  especially  France,  England  and 
America.  In  Germany,  Austria,  Italy  and  Spain  the 
idea  is  equally  active,  though  for  various  reasons  not 
yet  so  victorious. 

1  Before  this  event  not  a  constitution  in  the  sense  of  the  word  now 
usual,  existed.  At  present,  only  the  Czar  and  the  Sultan  rule  in  the  old 
fashion,  and  even  they  are  forced  by  public  opinion  local  and  ecumenical, 
diligently  to  consult  the  popular  weal. 

2  Of  civilized  lands  only  Spanish  America  and  Brazil  retain  slavery,  and 
in  both  laws  exist  which  are  rapidly  working  its  extirpation.  Nearly  all 
the  emancipation  edicts  and  statutes  of  modern  times  have  been  uttered 
since  the  opening  of  the  French  Revolution.  Roscher,  Pol.  Economy,  I, 
224. 

8  Including  i)  the  enlargement  of  the  territories  ruled  from  a  single 
centre,  and  ii)  the  strengthening  of  the  central  authorities  in  nations. 
Steam  and  telegraphic  communication  have  aided  this  tendency.  Rail- 
ways and  telegraphs  explain  why  our  generation  has  witnessed  the  rise  in 
Germany  of  the  first  solid  central  government  in  all  history.  But  for  them 
the  United  States  could  not  be  permanently  and  strongly  ruled  as  a  single 
nation,  and  the  victory  of  central  government  in  the  Civil  War  would  have 
been  in  vain. 

4  Tendency  2  would  have  maintained  Austrian  lordship  in  Italy,  keeps 
Elsass-Lothringen  German,  and  urges  Austria  and  Russia  to  appropriate 
the  Balkan  peninsula.     Tendency  3  has  nearly  expelled  Austria  from  Italy 


THE    FRENCH   REVOLUTION  349 

and  promises  to  do  so  entirely.  Which  will  prevail  over  Elsass-Lothringen 
remains  to  be  seen.  Of  course  2  prompts  France  to  get,  as  Germany  to 
keep,  these  districts,  yet  3  is  the  force  which  will  recover  them  to  France 
if  this  ever  occurs.  Tendency  3  shows  itself  in  new  attention  to  languages. 
Magyar  has  become  the  official  and  literary  tongue  in  Hungary,  Tscheck 
is  acquiring  like  dignity  in  Bohemia,  Servian  in  Servia,  Bulgarian  in  Bul- 
garia and  Roumelia,  Roumanian  in  Roumania,  Polish  in  Galicia. 
6  Cf.  Ch.  IX,  §  20. 

§  2     Importance  of  the  French  Revolution 

Morley,  Voltaire,  also  his  Rousseau.     Taint,  Ancient  Regime.     Sybel,  bk.  i. 
Harrison,  as  in  bibliog.     Van  Laun,  ch.  i. 

This  new  and  strongly  marked  historical  period  began 
for  Europe  with  the  French  Revolution,  an  event 
epochal  almost  without  parallel.  Whatever  opinion  be 
held  of  its  character1  in  other  respects,  no  one  can 
question  the  importance  of  this  Revolution  in  shaping 
political  ideas  and  affairs  since.  Its  significance  does 
not  lie  in  the  mere  facts  that  France,  from  a  condition 
of  abject  weakness  which  made  her  the  scorn  of  Europe, 
suddenly  roused,  changed  her  form  of  government,  and 
in  so  few  years  forced  a  continent  to  her  feet,  her  em- 
pire surpassing  Charlemagne's  in  size,  recalling  that  of 
Augustus.  It  resides  rather  in  the  irresistible  will  first 
revealed  in  all  this  against  monarchical,  feudal  and 
ecclesiastical  oppression  and  unreason,  against  a  de- 
cayed, inefficient  and  inexpressibly  burdensome  public 
system.  It  was  passion  for  a  rational  public  order, 
educated  and  developed,  in  part  perversely,  by  a  series  of 
able  and  trenchant  French  writers,2  and  fired  to  frenzy 
by  Bourbon  tyranny,  stupidity  and  immorality,  that  was 
the  proximate  cause  of  the  brilliant  deeds  referred  to, 
as  well  as  in  turn  their  most  lasting  and  benign  result. 


350  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

Only  from  this  its  central  character  can  the  French 
Revolution  be  justly  judged.  If  it  is  viewed  thus  its 
errors  and  excesses  may  be  explained  and  partly  con- 
doned, as  the  inevitable  friction  generated  in  producing 
a  great  and  worthy  piece  of  work  against  fearful  resis- 
tance. To  know  the  remoter  causes  of  this  gigantic 
social  upheaval,  glance  at  the  condition  of  society3  in 
France  under  the  dying  regime. 

1  Janet,  Philos.  de  la  Rev.  Francaise,  Harrison,  as  above.  One  hears 
and  reads  still  the  most  divergent  views  not  only  of  the  Revolution 
but  also  of  its  leading  characters.  Compare,  for  example,  Taine's  and 
Stephens's  [the  two  newest  writers]  view  of  Marat.  Michelet,  Morley 
and  Blanc  are  the  least  compromising  defenders  of  the  Revolution,  though 
of  course  criticising  much  that  attended  it.  Many  who  inveigh  against  it 
really  accuse  only  its  excesses,  horrible  indeed.  But  there  are  able  writers, 
like  Taine  and  Sir  Henry  Maine,  evidently  not  believing  in  government 
by  the  people,  who  reprobate  the  Revolution  itself,  believing  that  what- 
ever good  it  may  have  brought  could  have  been  attained  without  it.  For 
a  criticism  of  Taine's  position,  Rev.  historique,  Jan.-Feb.,  1885,  118  sqq. 
In  this  hostile  mode  of  viewing  the  great  movement  Burke's  Reflections 
led  the  way,  swayed  too  much  in  flieir  judgment  of  it  as  a  whole  by  the 
late  of  the  unfortunate  lady  who  had  so  impressed  the  author  when  in 
France.  'It  is  now  16  or  17  years,'  he  says,  'since  I  saw  the  Queen  of 
France,  then  the  Dauphiness,  at  Versailles;  and  surely  never  lighted  on 
this  orb,  which  she  scarcely  seemed  to  touch,  a  more  delightful  vision.  I 
saw  her  just  above  the  horizon,  decorating  and  cheering  the  elevated 
sphere  she  just  began  to  move  in,  glittering  like  the  morning  star,  full  of 
life  and  splendor  and  joy.  Oh !  what  a  revolution !  and  what  an  heart 
must  I  have,  to  contemplate  without  emotion  that  elevation  and  that  fall ! ' 
Similarly  Sir  James  Mackintosh's  Vindiciae  Gallicae  introduced  the  appre- 
ciative criticism  of  the  Revolution,  whose  freshest  note  Frederic  Harrison 
has  sounded  in  saying:  'The  history  of  our  entire  19th  century  is  precisely 
the  history  of  all  the  work  which  the  Revolution  did  leave.  The  Revolu- 
tion was  a  creating  force  even  more  than  it  was  a  destroying  force;  it  was 
an  inexhaustible  source  of  fertile  influences;  it  not  only  cleared  the  ground 
of  the  old  society  but  it  manifested  all  the  elements  of  the  new  society. 
Truly  we  may  call  the  Revolution  the  crisis  of  modern  reconstruction :  — 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  35 1 

"  When  France  in  wrath  her  giant  limbs  upreared, 
And  with  that  oath  which  smote  air,  earth  and  sea, 
Stamped  her  strong  foot  and  said  she  would  be  free." ' 

2  Those,  among  others,  mentioned  in  §  8. 

3  The  very  best  brief  discussion  is  Ducoudray,  ch.  i,  drawn  in  consid- 
erable part  from  Taine,  Ancien  Regime.  Read  also  Taine  himself,  and 
Buckle,  H.  of  Civ,  in  Eng.,  vol.  i,  chaps,  viii-xiv. 


§  3    Monarchy 

Bancroft,  U.  S.,  vol.  v,  264  sqq.  Morris,  i.  Came,  Louis  XIV  and  L.  XV.  Philipp- 
son  [in  Oncken],  Zeitalter  Ludwigs  XIV.  Buckle,  Civ.  in  England,  ch.  xiv. 
Poole,  Huguenots  of  the  Dispersion.  Kitchin,  bks.  v  and  vi.  Blanc,  bk.  ii,  ch.  vi. 
Michelet,  France,  vols,  xiii-xv.  Martin,  do.,  vols,  xiv,  xv.  Burke,  Reflections, 
pt.  i,  §  2.    Lodge,  Mod.  Europe,  ch.  xiii. 

Though  Louis  XIV's  tyranny  in  other  things  must 
at  last  have  brought  down  his  power  from  the  dizzy 
height  it  attained  through  his  earliest  wars,1  it  is  signifi- 
cant that  decline  first  became  pronounced  after  he  had 
revoked  the  Edict  of  Nantes,  1685.  From  this  act, 
setting  ■  at  naught  all  the  rights  consecrated  by  edicts 
and  by  the  long  patience  of  those  protestants  whom 
Mazarin  had  called  the  faithful  flock,'  came  dire  results, 
partly  internal,  partly  external.  The  reformers  by  hun- 
dreds of  thousands  carried2  into  England,  Holland  and 
Brandenburg  their  industries,  skill,  capital  and  bitter 
resentments.  Protestant  rulers,  indignant,  opened  their 
doors,  feeling  themselves  insulted,  as  well  as  menaced 
in  respect  to  their  faith  and  the  stability  of  their  thrones. 
By  the  next  two  wars,  France,  fighting  her  own  sons,s 
and  fatally  feeling  the  swords  of  William  of  Orange, 
Marlborough  and  Prince  Eugene,  was  left  'exhausted, 
gasping,  at  wits'  end  for  men  and  money.  Absolutism 
had  obtained  from  national  pride  the  last  possible  exer- 
tions, but  had  played  itself  out  in  the  struggle.'     So 


352  THE   FRENCH   REVOLUTION 

long  as  Louis  XIV  lived,  such  was  his  personal  force, 
such  the  memory  of  his  deeds,  that  the  monarchy  re- 
tained appearance  of  considerable  solidity.  Not  so  in 
Louis  XV's  reign,4  decadent  throughout  in  conse- 
quence of  his  vices,  impotence  and  subservience  to 
every  faction.  Depraved  women  directed  the  state,  to 
foolish  alliances  and  fatal  wars.  Immense  territory5 
was  lost.  Frederic  the  Great  laughed  at  the  thought 
that  France  could  effect  aught  by  protesting  against 
the  partition  of  Poland,6  At  home,  nothing  was  done 
to  unify  the  people,  interest  them  in  the  government  or 
develop  national  resources,  but  everything  tended 
mightily  in  the  contrary  direction.  In  such  ruin  was 
France  at  the  accession  of  the  well-meaning  Louis 
XVI,7  that,  had  this  monarch  been  a  second  Richelieu 
instead  of  the  cipher  he  was,  his  effort  to  preserve  the 
old  monarchy  must  have  proved  about  equally  vain. 

1  The  first,  the  war  of  '  devolution,'  i667-'8,  secured  him  [Ch.  IX,  §  3, 
n.  4,  end]  12  fortified  places  on  the  Belgian  frontier,  including  Lille  and 
Tournay.  In  this  Louis  was  maintaining  the  claim  of  his  wife  as  daughter 
of  Philip  IV  of  Spain  by  a  first  marriage,  to  inherit  against  a  son  by  a 
second.  The  second  war,  l672-'8,  was  against  Holland,  aided  by  the 
empire;  England,  Sweden  and  some  German  states  allying  themselves 
with  Louis.  The  ensuing  Peace  of  Nymwegen,  1678,  gives  Louis  nothing 
from  Holland,  but  Franche  Comte  and  12  new  Belgian  towns  from  Spain, 
and  Freiburg  from  the  empire.  The  process  of  'reunion'  was  this. 
French  courts  decided  what  the  last  four  Peaces  had  given  France,  and  the 
king  executed  the  decisions  with  troops.  Under  this  slim  sanction  Louis 
seized  Strassburg,  and  occupied  Luxemburg,  Treves  and  Lothringen,  the 
empire  being  too  weak  to  oppose.  His  third  war,  i688-'97,  for  alleged 
possessions  in  the  Palatinate,  roused  all  Europe  against  him,  England  too, 
under  Win.  Ill,  its  king  from  1689,  and  not  only  yielded  him  nothing,  but 
cost  him  the  first  loss  of  French  territory  since  Richelieu,  viz.,  Pignerol 
and  all  the  possessions  which  '  reunion  '  had  taken  from  the  empire.  This, 
as  King  William's  W.,  extended  to  America.     L.'s  fourth  war,  I70i-'i4, 


THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION  353 

over  the  Spanish  succession,  the  Queen  Anne's  W.  of  American  hist., 
weakened  France  the  most  fatally.  The  question  was  whether  the  grand- 
son of  Louis  or  the  son  of  Emperor  Leopold  I  should  be  king  of  Spain  on 
the  death  of  the  childless  King  Charles  II.  The  French  prince  took  pos- 
session. To  maintain  the  European  balance  of  power,  i.e.  avert  the  threat 
of  union  between  France  and  Spain  under  one  crown,  England  and  Holland 
went  to  war  for  the  Austrian  claimant.  Twice  Louis  was  ready  to  make 
peace  but  the  allies  proffered  too  severe  terms.  Meantime,  the  Austrian 
candidate  having  become  emperor  by  the  death  of  his  father  and  older 
brother,  the  interest  of  the  balance  of  power  favors  the  French  occupant, 
who  is  confirmed  as  Philip  V  of  Spain,  the  coalition  against  him  breaking 
down.  But  while  the  P.  of  Utrecht,  1713,  gives  Spain  to  Philip,  it  con- 
veys the  dependencies  of  Spain :  the  Netherlands,  Milan,  Naples  and 
Sardinia,  to  Austria,  and  ordains  that  the  crowns  of  Spain  and  France 
shall  never  be  united,  as  they  never  have  been.  Marlborough  and  Prince 
Eugene  of  Savoy  were  Louis's  great  military  antagonists  in  this  war. 
Blenheim,  Ramillies,  Malplaquet  and  Oudenarde  the  famous  battles. 
Von  Noorden,  Europdische  Gesch.  hit  XVIII  Jahrh.,  Abth.  I,  is  the  great 
auth.  on  this  war 

2  Cf.  Poole,  II.  of  the  Huguenots  of  the  Dispersion. 

3  A  regiment  of  French  refugees,  led  by  Schomberg,  fought  at  the 
battle  of  the  Boyne,  July  1,  1690,  against  James  II,  whom  Louis  XIV's 
troops  were  supporting.  The  like  occurred  on  many  another  field  here 
and  there  in  Europe. 

4  1 71 5- 1 774,  the  Regency  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans  lasting  till  1723. 
L.  XV  was  great-grandson  to  Louis  XIV,  the  son  of  an  older  brother  of 
Philip  V  of  Spain  [n.  1].  Pressed  by  his  minister  to  attend  to  affairs  of 
the  state  he  would  retort,  '  Bah,  the  crazy  old  machine  will  last  out  my 
time  and  my  successors  must  look  out  for  themselves.'  '  Unhappy  man, 
there  as  thou  turnest  in  dull  agony  on  thy  bed  of  weariness,  what  a  thought 
is  thine !  Purgatory  and  Hellfire,  now  all  too  possible,  in  the  prospect : 
in  the  retrospect,  —  alas,  what  thing  didst  thou  do  that  were  not  better 
undone?  what  mortal  didst  thou  generously  help?  what  sorrow  hadst  thou 
mercy  on?  Do  the  500,000  ghosts  who  sank  shamefully  on  so  many 
battle-fields  from  Rossbach  to  Quebec,  that  thy  Harlot  might  take  revenge 
for  an  epigram,  —  crowd  round  thee  in  this  hour?  Thy  foul  Harem;  the 
curses  of  mothers,  the  tears  and  infamy  of  daughters?  Miserable  man! 
thou  hast  done  evil  as  thou  couldst :  thy  whole  existence  seems  one 
hideous  abortion  and  mistake  of  Nature.'  —  Carlyle. 

5  All  French  America,  by  the  French  and  Indian  War,  1 756— '63,  a 


354  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

phase  of  the  7  Yrs.  War  in  Europe.  Ninety-five  per  cent  of  France's  ter- 
ritory in  India  also  went  to  England  by  this  war,  founding  England's 
power  in  that  country.  Louis  XV  had  failed  in  two  wars  before  this  one, 
i)  1733— '5,  to  keep  his  Polish  father-in-law,  Stanislaus  Lesczinski,  on  the 
Polish  throne,  ii)  the  \V.  over  the  Austrian  succession,  i740-'8,  in  which 
he  sided  with  Karl  Albert  of  Bavaria  against  Maria  Theresa.  Cf.  Ch.  XI, 
§  6,  n.  1. 

6  The  first  of  the  three  partitions,  that  of  1772,  between  Russia,  Prussia 
and  Austria.  Russia  and  Prussia  made  a  new  division,  1793,  and  all  three 
powers  again  in  1795,  the  last  appropriating  Poland  entire. 

7  Louis  XVI  was  L.  XV's  grandson.  Louis  the  Dauphin  died  before 
his  father,  leaving  several  children,  of  whom  Louis  XVI,  Louis  XVIII 
and  Charles  X  became  kings.  Who  was  Louis  XVII?  The  young  son 
of  Louis  XVI  and  Marie  Antoinette,  abused  to  death  [1795],  at  10  yrs.  of 
age  by  his  revolutionary  keepers. 

§  4    Nobility 

Taint,  Ancient  Regime,  bk.  i.     Sybil,  'der  alte  Staat  u.  Rev.  in  Fr.'  in  Kl.  hist. 
Sckr.,  vol.  iii.     Douiol,  La  Rev.  fr.  et  la  feodalite. 

Monarchy  in  France  had  thrust  feudalism  from  first 
place  but  had  no  wise  destroyed  it.1  At  a  hundred 
points  it  was  as  oppressive  in  the  eighteenth  century 
as  ever.  Immense  estates  were  the  rule.  Of  the  twenty- 
seven  million  inhabitants  of  France  in  1789,  nobility 
comprised  but  eighty-three  thousand,  yet  one-fifth  of 
the  land  was  in  their  hands.2  They  appointed  to  all 
offices  and  emoluments  on  their  domains ;  all  confis- 
cated property,  also  all  to  which  owners  or  heirs  were 
wanting,  abandoned  estates,  etc.,  fell  to  them.  Almost 
as  extensively  as  of  old,  the  lord  owned  the  land.  Even 
the  royal  domains  encompassed  by  his,  were  themselves 
virtually  his.  Of  rivers  not  navigable,  islands,  fish, 
wrecks,  etc.,  he  was  sole  proprietor.  For  purposes  of 
hunting,  even  the  private  enclosures  of  others,  if  in  his 
jurisdiction,  had  to  be  opened  at  his  word.     His  game 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  355 

could  eat  vassals'  crops  with  impunity,  vassals'  grain 
must  be  ground  at  his  mill,  for  a  toll  of  one-sixth,  one- 
sixth  the  price  of  land  sold  went  to  him,  and  so  on. 
Besides,  large  numbers  of  nobles  were  heavily  pen- 
sioned at  public  expense.  But  worst  was  that  neither 
state  nor  people  got  the  slightest  return  for  all  this.3 
Nobles  enjoyed  almost  total  exemption  from  taxation  ; 
as  a  class  they  were  ignorant  and  entirely  unpatriotic ; 
most,  neglecting  their  lands  and  local  duties,  idled  away 
their  time  at  court  or  in  town,  caring  nothing  for  their 
tenants  save  to  bleed  them.  Yet,  insolent  and  burden- 
some in  equal  degree,  the  more  worthless  they  became 
the  more  stoutly  did  they  insist  on  their  full  feudal 
rights  over  and  against  the  people. 

i  Ch.  vi,  §  20. 

2  I.e.,  -g^s  of  the  population  owned  ^  of  the  land.     The  clergy  and 
nobles  had  §  of  all  the  land,  the  nobles  alone  $»  the  clergy  alone  ^. 
8  v.  Sybel,  vol.  i,  24  sqq.,  Taine,  Ancient  Regime,  bk.  ii. 

§  5     Clergy 

Sybel,  bk.  i,  ch.  i,  bk.  ii,  ch.  iii.     Taine,  Ancient  Regime,  bk  i.    Morris,  i. 
Ducoudray ,  46  sqq.     Burke,  Reflections,  pt.  i,  §  1. 

Though  nearly  half  the  soil  in  France  belonged  to  the 
church,  this  was  but  a  part  of  the  immense  wealth 
wherewith  the  piety  of  twelve  centuries  had  endowed 
it.  The  main  income  went  to  seven  or  eight  hundred 
abbots,1  a  hundred  and  thirty-one  bishops  and  arch- 
bishops. These  exalted  clergymen,  mostly  from  noble 
families,  were  quite  as  selfish,  useless  and  tyrannical  as 
their  relatives  not  in  orders.  As  a  rule  each  abbot  took 
two-thirds  the  revenue  of  his  foundation,  leaving  the 
monks  to  starve  upon  the  rest.      Bishops  spent  their 


356  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

incomes  in  extravagance  if  not  in  rioting,  farming  their 
lands  to  heartless  agents,  who  screwed  from  the  hapless 
tenants  their  uttermost  sou.  Many  a  powdered  ecclesi- 
astic kept  an  establishment,  which,  with  its  palace,  plate 
and  equipages,  could  vie  in  splendor  with  Versailles 
itself.  The  Chdteau  de  Saverne,  residence  of  Cardinal 
de  Rohan,  Bishop  of  Strassburg,  whose  kitchen  utensils 
were  of  solid  silver,  had  seven  hundred  beds,  a  hundred 
and  eighty  horses  were  in  its  stalls.2  Under  these 
clerical  magnates,  so  worldly  and  haughty,  crouched  the 
great  horde  of  parish  priests,  living  on  the  scantiest  pit- 
tance that  would  sustain  life,  and  striving,  disinterest- 
edly in  the  main,  to  minister  to  the  people's  spiritual 
welfare.  Hardest  for  these  faithful  souls  was  not  the 
meagreness  of  their  own  support,  but  the  sight  of  the 
irremediable  poverty  around  them  and  the  necessity 
put  upon  them  by  their  superiors,  whom  they  dared  not 
disobey,  of  perpetually  wringing  the  mites  from  their 
already  poverty-stricken  parishioners.3 

1  There  were  also  some  280  nunneries.  The  exact  number  of  these 
religious  houses  is  not  known.  Not  all  the  abbots  were  so  selfish,  some 
sharing  their  incomes.  There  were  convents  occupied  by  4  or  5  monks 
each,  which  enjoyed  from  30  to  40  thousand  livres  apiece  yearly  [the 
livre  =  about  T*j  a  pd.  sterling]  without  bestowing  a  farthing  in  charity. 
Ducoudray,  43. 

2  This  gentleman  was  also  abbot  of  Noirmoutiers  and  Saint-Waast,  and 
pocketed  7  or  8  hundred  thousand  livres  of  rent.  It  was  he  who  was  so 
unfortunately  involved  in  the  necklace  affair  with  Marie  Antoinette.  See 
Carlyle's  Essay,  and  Blanc,  vol.  ii,  ch.  ii.  Brienne,  Archbishop  of  Toulouse, 
realized  678,000  livres  of  revenue,  i.e.,  nearly  ^52,154.  Some  ecclesias- 
tics fared  less  sumptuously,  and  a  great  part  of  the  iniquity  lay  in  this. 
Cardinal  Fleury  was  at  first  bishop  of  Frejus,  and  so  poor  that,  it  is  said, 
he  used  to  entitle  himself  'bishop  by  the  divine  wrath.' 

8  Read  Voltaire,  '  The  Country  Vicar,'  in  Dictionnaire  philosophique. 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  357 


§  6    The  Third  Estate1 

Doniol,  Hist,  des  classes  rurales.     Dareste,  H.  des  classes  agricoles.     Taint, 
Ancient  Regime,  bk.  v.     Young,  Travels  in  France,  i787~'9. 

This  comprised  the  body  of  the  population,  including 
what  is  now  sometimes  called  the  'fourth  estate.'  The 
moral  and  financial  hope  of  France  lay  in  the  middle 
class,  third  estate  in  the  narrower  sense  :  lawyers,  pro- 
fessors, physicians,  business  men.  Of  late,  partly 
through  John  Law's  2  costly  demonstration  of  the  power 
of  credit,  this  portion  of  society  had  acquired  greater 
riches  than  ever.  From  plebeian  millionnaires  almost 
alone  could  kings  and  princes  borrow.  As  France's 
best  financiers,  also  out  of  interest  in  the  state,  heavily 
their  debtor,  these  men  became  students  of  politics  and, 
so  far  as  permitted,  active  therein.  Outdoing  the 
nobility  in  culture  and  intelligence  as  well  as  in  ready 
wealth,  always  in  requisition  for  those  public  tasks 
which  required  special  training,  skill  and  versatility, 
they  naturally  chafed  under  the  discriminations,  social 
and  in  respect  to  political  power  and  burdens,  made 
against  them.  'What,'  asked  Sieyes,3  'is  the  third 
estate  ?  Everything.  What  has  it  been  till  now  ? 
Nothing.  What  does  it  ask  for  ?  To  become  some- 
thing.' But  the  poor  fourth  estate  had  the  most  to 
complain  of.  Nine-tenths  of  the  population  possessed 
no  property,  in  some  provinces  even  serfdom  lingered 
yet.  The  poverty  of  all  was  terrible.  Oats,  buckwheat, 
bran,  formed  the  entire  diet  of  many  "thousands,  in 
mountainous  parts  whole  communities  lived  on  chest- 
nuts, while  pork  and  goat-flesh  were  rare  delicacies,  to  be 


358  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

tasted  by  the  most  favored  perhaps  at  Christmas. 
Houses  were  thatched  and  without  windows,  floors  of 
earth.  Multitudes  went  barefoot  in  midwinter.  Bread 
riots  were  continual.  Frequent  famines  filled  cities 
with  beggars  :  in  1753  over  eight  hundred  died  of  cold 
and  hunger  in  Paris  alone.4  Intellectually  the  masses 
fared  no  better,  ignorant  parish  priests  being  their  sole 
instructors. 

1  The  French  Revolution  was  the  victory  of  the  third  estate.  Cf.  Ch. 
VI,  §  16,  and  the  lit.  there  named,  esp.  Guizot  and  Blanc. 

2  A  Scotchman  who  secured  permission  of  the  Regent  in  1 716  to  open 
his  Royal  Bank  of  Fiance,  and  to  issue  paper  money  to  ten  times  the 
amount  of  the  public  debt.  The  Bank  had  a  lively  discounting  business, 
the  monopoly  of  tobacco  and  of  the  Louisiana  trade  [succeeding  to  the 
Mississippi  Co.],  the  rights  of  the  old  East  India  Co.  and  the  handling  of 
all  national  taxes.  Shares  were  in  enormous  demand,  rising  from  the  par, 
£500,  to  ,£18,000  apiece.  The  notes  were  better  than  gold,  and  their 
abundance,  raising  prices,  diffused  everywhere  the  appearance  of  pros- 
perity. Failure  came  of  course,  the  '  Mississippi  Bubble,'  as  it  was 
called,  bursting,  but  this  abuse  of  credit  taught  France  a  good  lesson  touch- 
ing its  use.  Lalor's  Cyclopaedia,  vol.  i,  230,  ii,  737,  Blanc,  vol.  i,  bk.  U 
ch.  vii. 

8  In  his  famous  pamphlet  on  the  Third  Estate.  It  did  for  the  Fr. 
Revolution  what  Tom  Paine's  Common  Sense  did  for  the  American. 

*  And  the  nobility,  how  unfeeling !  Duchess  de  Polignac  was  amazed 
that  people  were  so  clamorous  for  bread  when  nice  cakes  were  to  be  had 
for  four  sous  each. 

§  7     Economics 

Sybel,  bk.  ii,  ch.  iii.     Blanc,  vol.  iii,  ch.  i.     Young,  as  at  §  6. 

The  above  evils  were  largely  referrible  to  an  alto- 
gether vicious  and  irrational  economic  system,  public 
and  private.  The  Bourbon  kings  would  hear  nothing 
of  thrift,1  let  public  power  be  shamefully  abused  for  the 
promotion  of  class  interests.      I    In  every  department 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  359 

of  the  state's  service  offices  were  sold,  numberless  ones 
being  created  on  purpose  to  be  sold.  They  were  often 
made  hereditary,  often  carried  with  them  patents  of 
nobility  and  valuable  immunities.  2  The  incidence  of 
taxes,  even  apart  from  the  sweeping  and  unjust  exemp- 
tions above  noted,  was  as  bad  as  it  could  be  :  still  worse 
if  possible,  the  method  of  collection,  viz.,  the  old  Roman 
one  of  farming.  3  Guilds  and  corporations  of  the  most 
arbitrary  and  tyrannical  sort,  created  and  nourished  upon 
the  monstrous  principle  of  Henry  III,  'the  king  alone 
can  grant  the  right  to  labor,'  fettered  commerce  in  a 
thousand  ways.  Abolished  by  Turgot  in  1776,  they 
speedily  rose  anew  to  a  more  vigorous  power  for  mis- 
chief than  before.  4  All  manner  of  restrictive  laws 
upon  trade  wrought  in  the  same  direction.  So-called 
protective  tariffs  were  laid,  upon  domestic  imports  from 
province  to  province,  as  well  as  upon  foreign.  Salt2 
had  to  be  bought  of  government,  at  double  or  treble  its 
value,  a  given  amount  for  a  family  whether  needed  or 
not.  New  inventions,  new  methods  of  industry  were 
spurned.  5  These  and  other  abuses  depressed  agri- 
culture the  most.  One  fourth  of  the  arable  land  in 
France  lay  unfilled,  the  agricultural  system  was  still 
that  of  the  tenth  century.  Roads  were  few  and 
wretched.  Laws  forbade  the  export  of  agricultural 
produce.  Neither  landlord  nor  tenant  was  interested 
in  maintaining  fertility  of  soil.  The  whole  policy  of 
government  toward  the  rural  population  was  such  as  to 
discourage  industry  and  economy.  Taxes  were  of  about 
every  conceivable  nature,  collected  with  a  greed  as  of 
harpies.     Trifles  like  door-latches  were  attached  by  tax- 


360  THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

agents,  and  mites  seized  that  had  been  gotten  by  beg. 
ging.  The  peasant  with  bread  must  eat  it  in  secret  or 
be  additionally  taxed  as  getting  too  rich. 

1  See  Ad.  Vuitry,  in  Rev.  d.  deux  Mondes,  Dec,  1883,  748  sqq., 
Stephens,  II,  xii.  To  build  the  water-works  for  Versailles  20,000  men 
toiled  2  years.  During  the  5  peaceful  years  after  the  war  with  Holland 
the  grand  monarque  increased  his  annual  public  expenses  545  million 
livres,  while  the  annual  net  income  was  only  463  million,  adding  to  the 
debt  82  million  yearly.  This  deficit  went  on  swelling.  Cf.  §  9,  also  Blanc, 
vol.  i,  bk.  iii,  ch.  iii.  v.  Sybel,  vol.  i,  30  sqq.,  emphasizes  a  topic  often 
overlooked,  the  economic  benefits  flowing  to  France  from  the  Revolution. 

3  This  salt  burden  was  called  the  gabelle.  At  least  7  lbs.  of  salt  per  per- 
son a  year  must  be  bought,  besides  extra  for  any  general  purpose,  as  cur- 
ing meat.  Prices  of  salt  varied  with  provinces,  from  8  to  32  shillings  a 
lb.  Smuggling  was  universal.  There  were  10,000  culprits  yearly  for 
infraction  of  the  gabelle,  500  hung  and  500  sent  to  the  galleys.  Cf.  Van 
Laun,  I,  31  sq.-  '  In  Normandy  one  could  each  day  see  wretches  who 
had  no  bread,  seized,  sold,  and  executed  for  not  buying  salt.' — Ducoudray. 

§  8    Thought 

Taint,  Ancient  Regime,  bks.  iii,  iv.  Morley,  Voltaire,  also  his  Rousseau.  Grimm  [in 
essays],  '  Fr.  and  Voltaire,'  '  V.  and  Frederic  Great.'  Blanc,  vol.  i,  bk.  iii,  chaps,  i, 
ii,  vol.  iii,  ch.  ii.  Martin,  as  at  §  3.  Rousseau,  Contrdt  social  [vol.  10  of  Wks.  in 
Eng.]. 

Protestantism  was  still  illegal  in  France,  the  church 
outwardly  one.  Yet  a  most  vigorous  spirit  of  protest 
everywhere  prevailed,  against  whatever  stood  upon  mere 
authority  or  tradition,  partly  religious,  caused,  among 
much  else,  by  the  manifest  failure  of  Christianity,  as 
the  church  administered  it,  to  liberate  men's  souls  or 
purify  their  lives,  and  partly  intellectual,  a  stronger  love 
for  nature,  science,  the  present  life,  than  the  church 
approved.  Revelation  was  discarded,  reason  declared 
the  supreme  guide.  Along  with  these  ideas  went  a  new, 
more  liberal  mode  of  political  thinking,  proceeding  from 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  361 

the  great  writings  of  Montesquieu,1  admirer  of  the  Eng- 
lish constitution.  Also  France  was  now  reaping  the 
fruit  of  that  still  more  negative  bent  of  thought  intro- 
duced by  Locke's2  philosophy,  from  the  first  ardently 
studied  here,  with  especial  attention  to  its  materialistic 
bearings.  Condillac  set  aside  reflection  as  a  source  of 
ideas,  Helvetius3  reduced  virtue  to  egoistic  hedonism. 
La  Mettrie  and  Maupertius,  the  latter  in  the  famous 
Systhne  de  la  nature,  advanced  a  materialism  coarser 
yet,  decrying  belief  in  God,  freedom  and  a  soul  sepa- 
rable from  the  body,  as  baseless  and  mischievous 
vagaries.  Voltaire's  unbelief,  deism,4  and  at  first  Dide- 
rot's, was  more  moderate,  yet  the  Encyclope'dief'  their 
organ,  seemed  to  reason  away  *  law  from  the  state,  free- 
dom from  morality,  spirit  and  God  from  nature.'6  But 
the  philosopheme  most  influential  now,  this  too  in  part 
a  heritage  from  Locke,  partly  also  from  Hobbes  though 
originally  from  the  Stoicism  incarnate  in  the  Roman 
law,  was  the  conception  of  a  'law  of  nature.'  It  domi- 
nated Rousseau's  writings.  The  ideas  of  a  state  of 
human  nature 7  anterior  to  society,  of  society  as  a  con- 
tract, and  of  the  natural  rights  of  man,  were  phases  of  it. 
The  new  economic  doctrine  of  Physiocracy8  it  permeated 
completely.  Embodying  deep  and  inspiring  truth9  it 
blinded  men  to  its  radical  falsity.  And  even  the  good 
thinking  of  the  period  was  too  abstract  and  apriori, 
morbidly  reliant  on  formulae,  theories  and  'victorious 
analysis.' 10 

1  The  years  of  the  declining  monarchy  were  rich  years  for  thought  in 
all  spheres.  Montesquieu,  1689—1755,  in  his  Spirit  of  the  Laws,  weighs 
the  advantages  of  all  the  different  forms  of  government,  with  the  view  of 
displaying  the  superiority  of  constitutionalism.    The  work   greatly  influ- 


362  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

enced  Mirabeau  and  all  the  moderates  of  the  Revolution.    For  the  inf.  of 
English  thought  on  French,  see  Buckle,  Civ.  in  Eng.,  vol.  i,  ch.  xii. 

2  From  the  fundamental  Lockian  principle,  nihil  est  in  intellectu  quod 
non  fuerit  in  sensu,  Condillac,  1 7 1 5-80,  logically  and  correctly  deduced 
pure  sensationalism  in  philosophy,  causally  deriving  our  intellectual  powers 
and  stores,  in  a  word,  our  entire  inner  life,  from  sense-activity.  Locke's 
English  pupils  have  sought  to  deny  the  legitimacy  of  this  deduction,  but 
without  success.  Plainly,  however,  Locke  did  not  himself  see  this  mate- 
rialistic implication  of  his  theory,  failing  to  distinguish  clearly  between 
sense  as  the  cause  of  knowledge  and  sense  as  the  occasion  or  condition  of 
knowledge.  Leibnitz's  Noteveaux  Essais  and  esp.  Kant's  Critique  of  the 
Pure  Reason  correct  Locke  at  this  point,  demonstrating  the  total  power- 
lessness  of  sense  to  give  aught  more  than  the  crude  matter  of  knowledge, 
whose  form,  or  character  as  knowledge,  proceeds  entirely  from  the  action 
of  mind. 

3  Helvetius,  1715— '71,  followed  the  thought  of  Condillac  into  its  ethical 
bearings,  making  virtue  to  consist  solely  in  pleasure,  in  such  conduct  as 
shall  yield  to  the  individual  subject  in  question  the  utmost  satisfaction  [not 
necessarily  low  gratification]. 

4  The  doctrine  which  admits  a  personal  First  Cause  but  denies  revela- 
tion and  miracle. 

6  In  28  vols.,  prepared  on  purpose  to  discuss  all  the  great  matters  of 
human  interest  in  the  light  of  the  new  ideas.  Diderot,  i7i2-'83,  was 
editor-in-chief.  He  revised  all  the  articles  and  wrote  many.  D'Alembert, 
1717-83,  the  great  mathematician  and  physicist,  was  the  next  most  im- 
portant contributor.  Voltaire,  Rousseau,  Grimm,  Dumarsais,  d'Holbach 
and  Jancourt  each  wrote  more  or  less. 

6  Yet  the  negative  and  destructive  in  this  tendency  stopped  far  short 
of  what  might  have  been  predicted  from  the  execrable  abuses  prevalent  in 
both  state  and  church,  conditions  which  should  temper  our  judgment  even 
of  such  then  existing  skepticism  as  we  cannot  after  all  excuse.  Two  par- 
ties urged  ideas  which  were  visionary  indeed,  yet  in  a  sense  constructive : 
i)  The  Physiocrats,  wishing  in  whatever  efficient  mode,  to  free  the  indi- 
vidual from  the  terrible  tyrannies  and  limitations  besetting  him.  ii)  The 
Socialists,  intent  more  on  mere  change  of  rulers,  government  by  the  peo- 
ple. Voltaire  spoke  for  those,  Rousseau  and  his  disciple  Robespierre  for 
these. 

7  Hobbes's  Leviathan  is  the  classic  for  this  doctrine,  a  doctrine  which 
appears  also  in  Locke,  and  in  some  form  in  all  the  political  philosophiz- 
ing of  the  17th  and  1 8th  centuries.     It  inspired  the  English  Revolution 


THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION  363 

of  1688  and  the  American  Revolution,  as  it  did  the  French.    Even  Burke 
uses  it  while  in  effect  seeking  to  refute  it. 

8  For  this,  see  '  Physiocrates '  in  Lalor's  Cyclopaedia,  and  Blanqui,  H. 
of  Pol.  Economy. 

9  There  is  a  sound  sense  in  which  one  may  speak  of  a  '  state  of  nature ' 
and  of  man's  '  natural  rights,'  viz.,  that  which  makes  these  expressions 
synonymous  respectively  with  '  rational  condition  '  and  '  liberties  accordant 
with  the  general  good.'  However  convenient  in  popular  exposition  some- 
times to  contrast  nature  and  culture  [or  civilization],  the  two  are  in  no 
wise  antagonistic,  the  truly  cultivated  man  being  even  more  than  the 
savage  in  a  state  of  nature.  Cf.  Maine,  Anc.  Law,  iv,  Voltaire,  •  La  loi 
naturel/e'  \_Oeuvres  vol.  xii],  '■Droits  des  Aommes'  [Diet. philos,  Oeuvres 
xxix],  'Nature'  [ib.  xlii]. 

10  Carlyle's  favorite  phrase  for  this  pedantry  or  '  philosophism.' 


§  9    Approach  of  Crisis 

Carlyle,  vol.  i.    Stephens,  I,  iii,  xii.    Herm.  Merivale,  in  Hist'l  studies, 
'  Precursors  of  the  Fr.  Rev.'    Blanc,  vol.  ii. 

Several  influences  more  specific  than  the  above  were 
at  work  in  various  ways  toward  a  revolutionary  result. 
1  Frequent  issue  of  lettres  de  cachet}  by  which  persons 
obnoxious  to  the  king  were  imprisoned  in  the  Bastille 
without  trial.  2  Increasing  use  of  tits  de  justice? 
whereby  the  king  nullified  the  ^//^/-legislative  power 
of  the  Parliament  of  Paris  to  '  enregister '  or  to  refuse 
enregistry.  3  Fickleness  and  general  weakness  of 
Louis  XVI,  who,  sincerely  desiring  reform  and  the 
people's  good,  through  lack  of  firmness  and  of  a  policy 
lent  ear  now  to  one  party,  now  to  another.  4  Distrust 
and  dislike  of  Marie  Antionette  as  Austrian  and  as  sus- 
pected of  using  her  influence  in  France  to  the  advan- 
tage of  Austria.  5  Hunger  and  enforced  idleness,3 
rendering  the  populace,  especially  in  Paris,  desperate, 
and  open  to  the  plots  of  demagogues  like  the  Duke  of 


364  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

Orleans.  6  Successful  revolution  in  America,4  which 
the  French  had  aided,  bringing  back  much  of  its  spirit. 
7  Frightful  public  debt  and  increase  of  yearly  deficit, 
financial  trouble5  that  reached  back  to  Louis  XIV's 
extravagance  and  costly  wars.  After  the  American 
campaign  the  arrears  equalled  nearly  half  the  yearly 
revenue.  In  1787  a  deficit  of  198  million  francs,  credit 
being  exhausted,  placed  the  state  at  the  verge  of  bank- 
ruptcy. Various  schemes  of  reform  had  been  moved, 
the  most  radical  among  them  being  that  of  Turgot, 
Louis  XVTs  earliest  and  greatest  minister.  He  intro- 
duced free  trade,  better  modes  of  raising  taxes,  and  a 
broader  participation  in  political  rights.  Opposition 
was  instant,  fierce,  universal,  and  after  an  administra- 
tion of  about  eighteen  months,  Turgot  was  dismissed,  a 
martyr  to  the  ancien  regime,  nearly  all  his  innovations 
collapsing  at  once.  Necker,  less  radical,  brought  to  the 
government  credit  rather  than  real  financial  betterment, 
yet  introduced  enough  of  Turgot's  policy  to  invoke 
upon  himself  Turgot's  fate.  Calonne  began  with  prodi- 
gality, struck  perforce  into  the  path  of  his  predecessors 
and  fell  like  them. 

1  Sealed  warrants  of  arrest,  proof  against  all  habeas  corpus  proceed- 
ings. It  is  said  that  one  keeper  had  received  50.000  of  these.  Under 
Louis  XIV  and  L.  XV  the  Bastille  was  crowded  [§  11,  n.  1].  See 
'  Cachet,  Lettres  de,'  in  Lalor's  Cyclopaedia.  The  famous  man  in  the  iron 
mask  was  among  these  state  prisoners, — probably  [yet  no  one  knows] 
count  Ercolo  Matthioli,  of  Mantua,  who  had  deceived  Louis  XIV  in  a 
secret  treaty.  He  died  after  24  years  of  imprisonment,  Louis  commanding 
his  face  to  be  mangled  that  his  identity  might  never  be  made  out. 

8  Bastard  d'Estang,  Parlements  de  France,  I,  xii,  also,  same  topic, 
Voltaire,  Oeuvres,  xlii.  Cf.  ante,  Ch.  VI,  §  18,  n.  4,  and  Ducoudray,  22 
sqq.     On  the  abasement  of  this  Parliament  now,  v.  Sybel,  vol.  i,  508. 

*  See  §  6,  also  Taine,  Revolution,  bk.  i.    The  duke  of  Orleans  wts  the 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  365 

father  of  Louis  Philippe,  who  was  made  king  of  the  French  in  1830.  He 
was  Louis  XVTs  cousin,  although  voting  in  the  Convention  for  the 
latter's  execution.  He  was  also  a  bitter  enemy  to  Marie  Antoinette.  His 
nickname,  Philip  Egalite,  was  from  his  incessant  protestation  of  regard 
for  equality.  Spite  of  this  the  Convention  suspected  him  of  aiming  at  the 
crown,  imprisoned  him  April  8,  1793,  and  guillotined  him  the  next  Novem- 
ber. His  nature  was  weak,  and  schemers  used  him  in  working  their  ends. 
He  is  believed  to  have  instigated  the  mob  of  Oct.  5,  6,  1789,  to  leave 
Paris  and  attack  the  Versailles  palace.  Stephens,  I,  vii.  Mirabeau  and 
Lafayette  have  been  charged  with  this,  but  unjustly. 

4  Rosenthal,  America  and  France,  Bancroft,  U.  S.,  vol.  vi,  32  sqq. 
This  tremendous  influence  of  America  was  exerted  by  the  common  sol- 
diery, military  and  naval  officers  like  Lafayette  and  Rochambeau,  travellers 
like  Chastellux,  Brissot  de  Warville,  Mazzei,  and  most  of  all  by  the  Ameri- 
can thinkers,  Barlow,  Paine,  Jefferson  and  Franklin.  Franklin  impressed 
his  ideas  upon  all  classes,  learned  and  common  people,  the  sober  and 
the  frivolous  alike.  The  quaintness  of  his  dress  and  manners,  his  sagacity 
and  good  sense,  his  calm  firmness  and  high  principles  evoked  universal 
admiration.  Everything  became  &  la  Franklin :  snuff-boxes,  stoves, 
dishes,  ornaments,  furniture.  Franklin's  portrait  was  in  every  house. 
Pres.  A.  D.  White  summarizes  the  American  influences  as  i)  familiarity 
with  the  notion  of  revolution,  ii)  impartation  of  strength  to  French  ideas 
of  liberty,  iii)  practical  shape  given  to  the  conception  of  equality,  iv)  prac- 
tical combination  of  liberty  and  equality  into  republican  and  democratic 
institutions,  and  v)  an  ideal  of  republican  manhood  [Washington,  Frank- 
lin]. '  Borne  over  the  Atlantic  to  the  closing  ear  of  Louis  [XV],  King  by 
the  grace  of  God,  what  sounds  are  these;  muffled-ominous,  new  in  our 
centuries?  Boston  Harbour  is  black  with  unexpected  tea;  behold  a 
Pennsylvania  Congress  gather;  and  ere  long,  on  Bunker  Hill,  Democracy 
announcing,  in  rifle  volleys  death-winged,  under  her  Star  Banner,  to  the 
tune  of  Yankee-doodle-doo,  that  she  is  born,  and,  whirlwind-like,  will 
envelope  the  whole  world.' —  Carlyle. 

5  Blanc,  vol.  ii,  ch.  v,  Lalor's  Cyclopsedia,  vol.  ii,  737,  Ducoudray,  ii. 
Turgot,  who,  Malesherbes  said,  'had  Bacon's  head  and  I'Hopital's  heart,' 
like  so  many  other  reformers,  too  little  considered  how  slowly  genuine 
reforms  have  to  move.  Adam  Smith  often  met  Turgot  and  learned  much 
from  him.  Turgot  proposed  abolition  of  exemptions,  a  land  tax,  and  the 
general  application  of  physiocratic  ideas  [' Physiocrates '  in  Lalor].  The 
queen  was  the  bitterest  foe  to  all  retrenchment :  she  did  not  wish  Louis 
to  '  play  the  bourgeois,1  as  economizing  was  styled. 


366  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


§  10    States-General  and  Constituent  Assembly 

Taint,  Rev.,  bk.  ii.  Stephens,  I,  i,  ii.  Morris,  ii.  Ducoudray,  ii,  iii.  Aubrey-Vitet, 
Etats-generaux  avant  178Q,  in  Rev.  d.  d.  Mondes,  Jan.,  1883.  Michelet,  Precis, 
ch.  i.    Blanc,  vol.  it,  chaps,  vi-viii,  vol.  iii,  chaps,  iii,  iv. 

The  Parliament  of  Paris,  declining  to  enregister  edicts 
for  a  stamp  tax  and  equality  of  impost,  appealed  in  1787 
to  'the  Nation,  represented  by  the  States-General,'  as 
alone  competent  to  grant  the  king  the  extraordinary 
subsidies  now  needed  to  save  the  state.  Herein  the 
magistrates  voiced  a  feeling,  little  definite,  still  strong 
and  universal  in  France,  that  this  ancient  assembly, 
hailing  from  the  days  of  Philip  the  Fair,  and  formerly 1 
wont  to  be  convoked  at  every  specially  critical  turn  in 
national  affairs,  was  the  sole  power  on  earth  able  to 
cure  the  land's  appalling  ills.  Necker,  recalled  in  1788, 
finding  the  treasury  totally  empty,  fell  in  with  this  con- 
viction and  among  his  first  acts  induced  the  king  to 
decree  a  session  of  the  states-general  to  convene  early 
in  1789.  Each  province  was  to  forward  with  its  depu- 
ties a  list  of  complaints  and  instructions.  France  rung 
with  discussions  of  abuses  and  of  plans  for  remedy. 
Men  felt  that  the  era  of  popular  liberty  was  dawning. 
Two  capital  questions  were  the  most  hotly  debated, 
whether  the  third  estate  should  have  double  represen- 
tation, and  whether  voting  should  be  by  estates  or  by 
heads.  The  former  Louis  decided  affirmatively,2  the 
latter,  left  to  the  assembly  itself,  occupied  and  dis- 
tracted all  the  earlier  sittings,  nobles  and  clergy  insist- 
ing upon  voting  by  estates.3  This  scheme,  which  would 
have  insured  perpetuity  to  all  the  old  abuses,  the  third 
nobly  resisted.     Their  first  decisive  step,  the  inaugural 


THE   FRENCH   REVOLUTION  367 

act  of  the  French  Revolution,  came  on  June  17,  when, 
nobles  and  most  clergy  obstinate,  king  fickle  as  ever, 
they,  arrogating  supremacy  in  the  state  to  their  con- 
stituency, the  peopled  declared  themselves  the  National 
Assembly,  calling  upon  the  other  estates  to  join  them. 
These  were  soon  forced  to  yield.  In  this  triumph 
Si6yes  led,  his  more  radical,  democratic,  ideas  now 
steadily  gaining  in  ascendancy  over  the  tremendous 
influence5  and  more  conservative,  royalist  liberalism  of 
of  Mirabeau.  The  Assembly  assumed  the  title  'Con- 
stituent,' taking  oath  not  to  separate  till  France  had 
a  constitution.  The  king's  command  to  disperse,  to 
return  to  action  by  estates,  though  coupled  with  largest 
concessions  on  other  points,  was  heard  unheeded,  Mira- 
beau replying  :  'We  shall  yield  only  to  bayonets.' 

1  The  last  previous  meeting  had  been  in  1614,  in  the  reign  of  Louis 
XIII.  Richelieu  was  then  a  member.  On  the  various  states-general 
assemblies  that  had  been  held,  Thierry,  Tiers  Etat,  vol.  i,  also,  vol.  ii, 
Appendix  ii.     On  the  Parliament  of  Paris  now,  Ducoudray,  23. 

2  Which  of  course  amounted  to  nothing  unless  the  other  were  settled 
so  as  to  make  numbers  count.  It  was  like  the  king  to  be  decided  when 
this  would  cost  him  nothing,  shirking  when  decision  required  sacrifice. 

8  There  were  1145  deputies  in  all:  270  nobles,  291  clergymen,  584 
from  the  third  estate.  Had  voting  by  estates  prevailed,  the  delegates  of 
the  third  would  have  been  powerless  except  in  debate,  and  this  would 
have  amounted  to  little  upon  any  serious  issue. 

4  Thus  recurring  to  the  most  ancient  constitution  of  the  Frankish  state. 
See  Ch.  IV,  §§  9,  10.  Except  the  Declaration  of  American  Independence 
it  was  the  most  decisive  political  step  ever  taken  by  any  body  of  men. 

8  Decrue,  Les  idees  politique*  de  Mirabeau,  Rev.  historique,  XXII  and 
XXIII.  Cf.  Stephens,  vol.  i,  chaps,  xi,  xiv.  Mirabeau  was  the  colossus 
of  those  reformers  who  believed  in  a  constitutional  monarchy.  He  is 
Mr.  Stephens's  hero  of  the  opening  revolution,  'the  one  man  who  showed 
himself  a  statesman.'  Mirabeau  was  also  a  majestic  orator  and  an  able 
financier.  But  Sieves  was  more  bold,  aggressive,  crafty.  From  Necker, 
Stephens  strips  most  of  his  glory  as  a  statesman,  but  justly. 


368  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


§  ii     Revolution  Begun 

Taine,  Rev.,  bk.  i.     Sybel,  bk.  i,  ch.  ii.     Cherist,  Chute  de  Vancien  regime,  i787~'9. 
Stephens,  I,  v,    Michelet,  Precis,  ch.  ii.     Carlyle,  vol.  i,  bks.  v-vii. 

On  the  king's  reactionary  dismissal  of  Necker,  July 
ii,  and  his  call  of  Breteuil,  steps  intended  to  overawe 
the  Assembly  and  the  demagogues  at  Paris,  the  im- 
measurable slumbering  hatred  against  privileged  classes 
all  instantly  burst  forth.  In  Paris  the  mob  swept  every- 
thing before  it.  The  army,  even  the  royal  guard,  refuses 
to  attack  the  people,  the  national  guard  proves  little 
more  efficient.  The  mob  captures  and  destroys  the 
Bastille,1  July  14.  The  king  succumbs  and  will  recall 
Necker.  Influenced  by  La  Fayette  and  Bailly,  who 
wished  to  defeat  the  Duke  of  Orleans's  purpose  to 
make  himself  king,  Louis  appears  in  Paris  to  express 
to  the  people  his  acquiescence  in  the  Assembly  and  in 
reform.  The  government  now  passes  to  the  Assembly. 
Order  could  not  be  created  at  once.  'The  revolt  in 
Paris  had  produced  a  general  explosion  through  the 
whole  of  France,  by  which,  in  a  few  days,  the  old 
political  system  was  destroyed  forever.  In  all  the 
provinces  without  one  exception,  the  estates,  the  local 
magistrates,  the  civic  corporations,  the  peasants  and 
the  proletaries  rose  in  arms.  Royal  intendants  were 
nowhere  to  be  seen,  the  parliaments  wished  to  be 
altogether  forgotten,  the  old  courts  of  law  vanished 
without  leaving  a  trace.'  Civic  guards  were  every- 
where formed  to  repress  riot,  armed  from  royal  maga- 
zines. In  Caen  salt-tax  offices  were  gutted,  collectors 
barely  spared.     Similar  deeds  occurred  in  every  prov- 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  369 

ince.  Custom-houses  were  razed,  nobles  and  unpopular 
officers  of  government  hung,  castles  burned,  monas- 
teries pillaged,  all  reminders  of  the  old  system  expunged. 
The  Assembly,  regarding  it  the  sole  road  to  order, 
hastened  to  do  away  with  obnoxious  institutions  by  law, 
in  which  work  the  liberal  minority  of  nobles  was  honor- 
ably forward.  '  Serfdom,  feudal  jurisdiction,  manorial 
ground-rents,  tithes,  game  laws,  saleable  offices,  fees, 
clerical  robing  dues,  municipal  and  provincial  privileges, 
privileges  of  rank,  exemptions  from  taxes,  plurality  of 
offices  and  livings  —  all  were  swept  away  in  breathless 
haste  in  one  night.' 

1  A  prison,  built  during  Charles  V's  reign,  i364~'8o,  and  enlarged  by 
his  successor.  Prisoners  were  usually  not  ordinary  felons,  but  men  of 
mark  whom  some  person  in  power  wished  to  be  rid  of,  victims  of  court 
intrigue  or  of  feuds  in  high  families.  They  were  lodged  here  by  lettres  de 
cachet  [§  9,  n.  1],  which  were  sometimes  bought  from  the  king's  minister 
with  money. 

§  12    The  Constitution 

Stephens,  I,  ix,  x.     Michelet,  Precis,  chaps,  iii,  iv.      Morris,  iii.     Taine,  Revolution, 
bk.  ii,  ch.  iii.     Burke,  Reflections,  pt.  ii. 

The  programme  for  this  was  the  Assembly's  famous 
Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man,  proclaiming  the 
sovereignty  of  the  people,  the  admissibility  of  all  citi- 
zens to  public  employments  without  distinction  of  birth 
or  faith,  the  freedom  of  worship,  work  and  the  press, 
the  equality  of  all  citizens  before  the  law  and  in  respect 
to  taxation,  the  absolute  authority  of  the  law  as  the 
expression  of  the  general  will,  the  protection  by  it  of 
each  citizen's  liberty,  property  and  rights,  and  the  full 
responsibility  of  the  executive  power.     The  constitution 


370  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

proceeded  to  reconstruct  fundamentally  the  entire  pub- 
lic system  of  France  in  accord  with  these  sentiments  of 
'liberty,  equality,  fraternity.'  By  the  provisions  of  this 
instrument,  the  old  historic  provinces  of  France  yielded 
to  departments,1  these  subdividing  into  districts,  these 
into  rural  cantons  and  municipalities  or  communes. 
Suffrage  was  not  universal  but  limited  to  'active  citi- 
zens,' such  as  paid  a  tax  at  least  equal  to  three  days' 
labor.  Voters  were  to  elect  electors,  who  should  choose 
deputies  to  the  Assembly,  heads  of  departments,  dis- 
tricts and  cantons,2  judges,  even  bishops  and  priests. 
The  judicial  system  was  also  reformed  and  juries  intro- 
duced for  criminal  cases.3  The  Assembly  was  made 
monacameral  and  given  sole  initiative,  its  745  members 
to  be  renewed  by  biennial  elections.  Civil  marriage 
was  ordained,  also  the  free  exercise  of  religion  for  prot- 
estants  and  Jews,  as  well  as  equality  of  these  with 
others  in  all  civil  privileges.  The  lands  of  the  church 
were  sold,4  a  '  civil  constitution  of  the  clergy ' 5  enacted, 
monastic  vows  and  most  ecclesiastical  orders  done  away. 
These  ecclesiastical  innovations,  cursed  by  the  pope, 
evoked  from  the  clergy  obstinate  opposition,  the  first 
decided  check  which  the  Revolution  had  encountered, 
greater  even  than  was  occasioned  by  the  accompanying 
abolition  of  nobility.  Most  remarkable,  under  this  new 
constitution  the  king  became  the  mere  instrument  of 
the  people's  sovereignty,  the  executor  of  the  Assembly's 
edicts,  his  influence  in  legislation  about  null,  limited  to 
a  suspensive  veto  for  two  Assemblies.6  The  system 
had  place  for  a  king  but  no  need  of  one. 

1  83   departments,  574   districts,  4730  cantons.     Venaissin,  added  to 
France   in  1791,  formed   the  84th   department,  that  of  Vaucluse  [about 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  371 

Avignon].  The  departments  of  the  Rhone  and  the  Loire,  separated 
later,  then  formed  but  one.  That  of  Tarn-et-Garonne  was  created  in  1808, 
making  86.  The  annexation  of  Nice  and  of  Savoy  in  1859  raised  the 
number  to  89,  the  loss  of  Alsace-Lorraine  in  187 1  reduced  it  to  86  again. 
Division  into  departments  had  been  thought  of  before  for  the  provincial 
assemblies,  and  Ile-de-France  had  been  divided,  into  12  departments, 
smaller  of  course  than  those  of  1 790.  This  departmental  division  is  found 
also  in  most  of  the  regulations  of  1787  for  the  organization  of  provinces, 
and  the  name  everywhere  serves  to  designate  a  fraction  intermediate  be- 
tween the  province  and  the  electoral  district.  The  name  arrondissement 
[at  present  applied  to  the  district]  appears  also  at  the  same  epoch  as  des- 
ignating a  subdivision  of  the  department.    Ducoudray,  107. 

2  But  communes  were  to  be  governed  by  councils  elected  directly  by 
the  '  active  citizens,'  the  primary  electors. 

"  Though  not  in  civil,  where  questions  of  law  and  questions  of  fact 
could  not  be  kept  apart.  There  was  to  be  a  criminal  court  for  each  de 
partment,  a  civil  for  each  district,  justices  of  the  peace  for  each  canton, 
and  a  supreme  court  of  appeal  or  cassation,  last  resort  on  questions  of 
law.  The  arrangement  to  elect  judges  instead  of  their  appointment  by  the 
king  sprung  from  wish  totally  to  separate  judicial,  administrative  and 
legislative  functions. 

4  The  assembly  ceded  the  lands  to  the  communes,  then  issued  bonds 
['assignats']  payable  by  the  communes  and  secured  by  the  lands,  selling 
these  assignats  in  open  market  or  directly  paying  off  with  them  holders  of 
the  state  debt.  Assignats  were  usually  in  denominations  of  100  francs 
[$20]  but  some  were  smaller.  They  bore  no  interest  and  were  made  a 
legal-tender  currency.  This  led  to  over-issue,  and  this  to  depreciation. 
Blanc,  bk.  xiv,  ch.  Hi. 

5  The  new  constitution  made  every  department  a  diocese.  The  bishops 
were  divided  into  10  groups,  at  the  head  of  each  of  which  stood  a  metro- 
politan bishop.  No  bishop  was  to  be  confirmed  by  the  pope,  canonical 
investiture  proceeding  in  each  case  from  the  metropolitan.  The  system 
was  quite  analogous  to  that  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland.  As  to  ritual  and 
doctrine  priests  who  took  the  constitutional  oath  were  left  to  themselves. 
Many  of  them  kept  the  old  forms,  but  most  married  and  modified  their 
beliefs,  so  that,  after  Robespierre  [§  15],  when  churches  were  re-dedicated 
to  Christian  worship,  virtual  protestantism  predominated,  usually  under 
the  name  of  old  Catholicism.  But  for  Napoleon's  concordat  with  Pius  VII, 
France  might  have  become  a  protestant  country.   Stephens,  I,  x. 


372  THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

6  I.e.,  for  four  years,  each  Assembly  like  each  of  our  Congresses  exist- 
ing two  years.    Strictly,  as  it  could  only  postpone,  it  was  not  a  veto  at  all. 


§  13    Political  Grouping 

Taint,  bk.  iv.    Michelet,  Pricts,  ch.  v.     Blanc,  vol.  v,  ch.  v,  also  bk.  vil.     '  Camilla 
Desmoulins,'  Westminster  Rev.,  July,  1882.     Stephens,  I,  iv,  viii. 

Success  in  revolution  rendered  political  thought 
active,  heated  and  energetic  beyond  all  precedent.  The 
issue  between  the  old  order  and  the  new  gave  way  to 
that  between  monarchy  and  republicanism,  then  this 
to  strife  between  moderate  and  extreme  republican 
factions.  Of  clubs *  there  were  :  i  The  Feuillants,2 
constitutional  monarchists,  La  Fayette  and  Bailly  at 
head.  2  The  Jacobins,  republicans,  of  every  stripe,  in- 
cluding first  or  last  all  the  great  revolutionists.  This 
club  had  branches  throughout  France,  was  the  acknowl- 
edged and  efficient  organ  of  the  party,  creator  of  public 
opinion,  with  more  power  than  the  legislature  itself. 
For  months  at  a  time  it  was  the  de  facto  sovereign  of 
France.  3  The  Cordeliers?  anarchists,  nihilists,  red 
republicans,  led  by  Danton  at  first,  then  by  Hebert. 
Of  parties  the  Legislative  Assembly,  which  succeeded 
the  Constituent,  was  divided  into :  1  The  Extreme 
Right,  greatly  attached  to  the  king  yet  loyal  to  the 
constitution.  2  The  Right,  men  from  the  middle  ranks 
of  society,  moderate  royalists,  friends  of  the  constitu- 
tion but  inclined  to  ally  themselves  with  the  old  privi- 
leged classes  and  hostile  to  popular  rule.  The  leader  of 
these  was  La  Fayette.  Both  Right  and  Extreme  Right 
were  Feuillantists.  3  The  Centre,  consisting  of  timid 
and   insignificant4   members   and   usually  voting  with 


THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION  373 

4  The  Left,  the  Girondists,6  who  were  earnest  republi- 
cans, devoted  to  the  Revolution  even  at  the  expense  of 
the  constitution,  opposed  to  privilege  and  favoring  popu- 
lar government  yet  insisting  that  this  be  strong  and 
regular.  Here  stood  Roland,  Vergniaud,  Brissot,  Con- 
dorcet  and  many  other  of  the  ablest  and  best  men.  5 
The  Extreme  Left  or  '  Mountain,' 6  ultra-republicans, 
approaching  nihilism,  made  up  of  a  few  Cordeliers  with 
the  increasing  number  of  extreme  Jacobins.  Under 
the  Convention  the  Feuillants  disappeared  and  deadly 
struggle  was  joined  between  Gironde  and  Mountain. 
As  it  advanced  four  marked  types  of  republicanism 
shaped  themselves,  represented  respectively  by  Roland, 
pure  Girondist,  Danton,  now  become  relatively  conserv- 
ative, Robespierre,  socialist  yet  believer  in  public  order, 
and  Hebcrt,  downright  nihilist.  In  the  terrible  war  of 
these  factions  for  supremacy,  the  Gironde  fell  first,  then 
Hebert  and  his  colleagues  at  the  other  extreme,  last 
Dan  ton,  leaving  Robespierre  victor,  dictator  of  France. 

1  Taking  their  names  from  the  convents  in  whose  halls  they  had  their 
respective  headquarters.  The  Jacobin  centre  was  the  old  convent  on  rue 
St.  Honor  e,  the  Cordelier-convent  stood  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Seine,  and 
what  is  left  of  it  serves  as  laboratory  for  the  faculty  of  medicine  of  the 
University.  The  enclosure  of  the  Feuillant-convent  occupied  the  space 
now  lying  between  rue  St.  HonorS  and  the  terrace  of  the  Tuileries  garden, 
still  known  as  the  Terrasse  des  Feuillants.  The  buildings  were  destroyed 
in  1804  to  make  place  for  the  rue  de  Rivoli.  Ducoudray,  126.  Adequate 
treatment  of  these  clubs  would  have  to  be  dynamic,  as,  like  all  else  in 
France  then,  they  were  in  constant  movement  as  to  spirit  and  tendencies. 

2  These  were  till  July,  1791,  a  branch  of  the  Jacobins,  seceding  [under 
the  influence  of  the  eloquent  Barnave]  because  more  conservative  than 
the  main  body.  The  original  organization  began  in  1789  as  royalist,  sup- 
porting Philippe  Egalite  [§  9,  n.  3],  Louis  Philippe  being  for  a  time 
door-keeper  of  the  Paris  chapter.     On  the  growth  of  the  Jacobins,  Taine, 


374  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

bk.  iv,  ch.  ii.  There  was  a  club  at  Marseilles  by  the  end  of  '89,  one  in 
each  large  town  by  the  middle  of  '90,  in  August  of  this  year,  60,  3  months 
later  100,  in  March  of  '91,  229,  in  August  nearly  400.  Recruits  rapidly 
multiplied  after  the  Feuillant  secession,  July, '91 :  in  2  months  600  new 
clubs,  by  the  end  of  September  these  amount  to  1000,  in  June,  '92,  to 
1200,  at  the  abolition  of  monarchy,  Sept.  21,  '92,  to  26,000.  Vet  Taine  is 
of  opinion  that  the  total  enrolment  at  no  time  exceeded  300,000.  It  was 
their  discipline  which  made  them  so  powerful. 

8  These  too,  at  first,  a  mere  sect,  exceptionally  radical,  of  the  Jacobins. 
Danton  believed  in  using  terror  to  save  the  country,  but  when  this  was 
attained  favored  moderation.  Desmoulins's  Old  Cordelier  was  the  able 
exponent  of  Dantonist  views  now,  against  Hebert  and  his  ruffians,  repre- 
senting the  new  or  advanced  Cordeliers.  But  Danton  and  his  set  were 
infidels  and  free  and  easy  as  to  conduct,  while  Robespierre  was  a  sincere 
deist  and  affected  purity  and  even  austerity  in  morals.  Stephens  calls 
Danton  '  the  great  practical  statesman  of  the  second  period  of  the  Revolu- 
tion, the  one  great  man  who  perceived  the  necessity  for  a  strong  govern- 
ment to  re-establish  order.' 

4  Hence  nicknamed  '  Plain,'  'Swamp,'  '  Belly,'  'Flats.' 

5  So  called  because  their  chief  representatives  were  from  the  Gironde 
department.  Taine  sees  little  more  good  in  these  men  than  in  their  mur- 
derers. Madame  Roland  is  to  him  nothing  but  a  vain  and  self-deluded 
creature. 

8  Named  from  their  high  seats  in  the  Legislative  Assembly.  The 
Mountain  comprised  the  last  three  republican  factions  mentioned,  Robes- 
pierre as  well  as  Danton  and  Hebert.  On  Robespierre's  treachery  to 
Danton,  v.  Sybel,  vol.  iii,  296.  He  uses  D.  to  help  make  way  with  Hebert, 
then  sentences  Danton  as  well.  He  rides  out  with  D.  after  signing  the 
decree  for  his  execution.  On  Robespierre's  religious  belief,  same  as  Vol- 
taire's, see  v.  Sybel,  vol.  iii,  271,  279,  and  Lewes,  L.  of  Robespierre.  By 
long  effort  he  persuaded  a  majority  of  the  Jacobins  to  declare  for  belief  in 
God  and  providence.     On  his  death,  Blanc,  vol.  xi,  ch.  vii. 


§  14    Political  Forces  and  Currents 

Taine,  bk.  iv.    Sybel,  bks.  iii,  iv,  viii,  ch.  iv.   Van  Laun,  vol.  i,  end.    Blanc,  vols,  x,  xi. 

The  Gironde  was  able,  eloquent,  patriotic,  and  had  a 
majority  in  the  Assembly,  but  was  '  unable  to  appre- 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  375 

hend  the  fearful  nature  of  the  crisis,  too  full  of  vanity 
and  exclusive  party-spirit,  and  too  fastidious  to  strike 
hands  with  the  vigorous  and  stormy  Danton,'  the  only 
man  who  could  have  helped  it  to  popular  power.  '  The 
Mountain  represented  the  suffering  populace,  eager, 
defiant,  weary  of  negotiation,  suspicious  of  treason  at 
every  point,  and  zealously  determined  to  push  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Revolution  to  their  limits,  ready  for  war, 
come  what  might,  quite  honest  and  narrow,  a  very 
dangerous  and  powerful  party.' J  The  Mountain  won 
swift  victory,  but  in  order  to  this,  had  to  yield  in  dis- 
graceful degree,  a  necessity  which  both  Danton  and 
Robespierre  inwardly  regretted,  to  the  terrible  nihilistic 
rage  of  Hebert  and  his  Parisian  mob,  arch  enemies 
of  order,  who  viewed  the  Revolution  merely  as  the 
appointed  opportunity  to  plunder  the  rich.  The  influ- 
ence of  these  Nihilists  on  the  course  of  events  before 
Hebert's  fall  was  as  immense  as  it  was  baneful.  Their 
method,  persistently  used  and  about  always  successful, 
was  brow-beating  in  debate,  and,  this  failing,  intimida- 
tion through  murder,  riot  and  robbery.  The  odious 
secret  Committee  of  Public  Safety,2  whose  Reign  of 
Terror  so  long  dictated  France's  destinies,  took  orders 
mostly  from  them.  The  more  moderate  leaders  them- 
selves had  fatally  little  idea3  of  the  nature  of  free  insti- 
tutions and,  mere  theorists  as  they  too  nearly  were,  still 
less  of  the  means  to  the  attainment  of  them.  '  O 
Liberty,'  said  Madame  Roland  from  her  scaffold,  '  what 
crimes  men  commit  in  thy  name  ! ' 

1  Kitchin.  The  Mountain  and  the  '  Commune '  were  not  the  same, 
except  in  spirit,  the  latter  being  only  a  Parisian  affair.  Strictly  it  was  the 
city  of  Paris  governmentally  considered,  though  the  term  is  often  made 


37C  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

to  convey  a  bad  sense,  as  if  denoting  partly  or  exclusively  the  mob.  '  Com- 
munism '  is  an  economic  title  and  has  no  connection  with  '  Commune.' 
The  Terror  commenced  June  I,  1793,  when  Assembly  surrendered  to  Com- 
mune, giving  up  by  a  sort  of  Pride's  Purge,  80  of  its  Girondist  members. 

2  This  Committee  was  created  April  6,  1793,  composed  of  9  members, 
Danton,  Cambon  and  Barrere  the  chief.  In  June  St.  Just,  St.  Andre, 
Couthon,  Robespierre  and  Carnot  were  added.  A  Revolutionary  Tribunal, 
or  Star  Chamber,  was  also  erected,  of  which  the  Com.  of  Public  Safety 
had  charge,  and  this  duplex  arrangement  extended  to  every  Commune  in 
France.  Girondists  wished  to  trust  royalist  plotters  like  other  criminals 
to  the  ordinary  processes  of  law,  but  Mountain  and  Commune  would  not. 
Using  this  summary  procedure  ultra  revolutionists  were  enabled  to  secure 
membership  or  influence  in  the  Tribunal  and  wreak  vengeance  on  whom 
they  would.  But  when  schism  broke  out  among  the  fire-eaters  themselves 
their  fine  devices  proved  happily  efficacious  enginery  for  their  own  over- 
throw.    On  Paris  as  the  Workshop  of  the  Rev.,  Stephens,  I,  iv. 

3  'The  Constituent  Assembly  deliberately  refused  to  consider  man  as 
he  really  was,  and  persisted  in  seeing  nothing  in  him  but  the  abstract 
being  created  in  books.  Consequently,  with  the  blindness  and  obstinacy 
characteristic  of  a  speculative  surgeon,  it  destroyed  in  the  society  sub- 
mitted to  its  scalpel  and  to  its  theories  not  only  the  tumors,  the  enlarge- 
ments and  the  inflamed  parts  of  the  organs  but  also  the  organs  themselves, 
and  even  the  vital  governing  centres  around  which  the  cells  arrange  them- 
selves to  recompose  an  injured  organ.'  Taine.  His  arraignment  of  the 
Legislative  Assembly,  republican,  is  correspondingly  severer. 


§  15     March  of  the  Republic1 

Michtlet,  Pricis,  chaps,  ix,  xi,  xiv  sqq.    Morris,  iii-vii.     Blanc,  vol.  iv,  bk.  iv,  ch.  vi, 
bk.  v,  vol.  v,  bk.  vi,  bks.  viii  sqq. 

i  The  Legislative  Assembly?  1791-1792.  The  Gironde, 
furnishing  the  ministry,  directed  affairs  at  first,  intent 
upon  vigorous  war3  against  the  emigrants  and  their 
allies.  Ill  success  in  the  Belgian  campaign,  France 
being  invaded  and  Paris  threatened,  overthrows  the 
ministry,  whereupon,  the  king  calling  Feuillants  once 
more  to  office,  the  horrors  of  August   10,  1792,  ensue 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  377 

Priests  are  massacred,  the  king  is  suspended  and  im- 
prisoned and  all  power  thrown  into  radical  hands.  The 
Jacobins  are  now  on  high,  Marat  calling  loudly  for 
traitors'  heads,  Danton  for  '  de  Vaudace,  de  Vaudace, 
encore  de  Vaudace '  against  the  invaders.  This  inspiring 
cry  checks  the  tide  of  defeat,  Dumouriez  being  victor 
at  Valmy  on  September  20th.  Next  day  assembles,  ii 
T/ie  National  Convention,4  1 792-1 795,  which  at  its  first 
session  proclaims  France  a  republic.  Radicalism  goes 
mad  with  this  victory.  King,  Queen,  and  Duke  of 
Orleans  are  executed,  as  well  as  many  Feuillants  and 
even  Girondists.  The  Terror.5  Woe  now  to  any  one 
venturing  so  much  as  to  whisper  of  moderation.  Chris- 
tianity is  proscribed,  the  worship  of  Reason  ordained, 
commerce  paralyzed  by  the  excess  of  assignats.  Civil 
war  rages  in  la  Vendee.  A  new  calendar  6  and  a  new  con- 
stitution 7  are  devised.  Saint-Just  and  Couthon  with  and 
under  Robespierre  form  a  'triumvirate,'  ruling  France 
with  worse  than  Bourbon  arbitrariness  and  cruelty. 
Reaction  :  Robespierre  falls,8  anarchy  is  checked,  even 
the  Mountain  becomes  conservative,  Dantonists  and  the 
Gironde  gradually  return  to  power.  The  'Thermido- 
rians '  close  the  Jacobin  clubs,  open  churches  and  seek 
to  restore  public  tranquillity,  now  threatened  mainly  by 
royalists  again.  With  the  constitution  of  1795,  the 
year  III,  comes  in  the  moderate  government  of  iii  The 
Directory,  1795  to  end  of  1799.  Task,  to  guard  the 
Republic  from  anarchists,  now  desperate,  and,  harder 
yet,  from  the  monarchists,  who  were  daily  increasing 
and,  as  represented  in  both  Councils  and  at  length  in 
the  Directory  itself,  more  hopeful  and  insolent.     These 


378  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

extremists  aside,  there  was  general  apathy  as  to  politics 
and  wish  for  peace  at  any  price.  Spite  of  the  Direc- 
tory's best  efforts9  internal  disorder  was  terrible  and 
constitutional  rule  impossible.  The  coup  d ' itat  had  to 
be  used,  first  against  royalists,  then  against  republicans. 
The  press  throttled,  all  Europe  threatening,  France 
sighed  for  rest  and  prepared  to  return,  with  the  Con- 
sulate, to  absolutism. 

1  1789,  States-general  meet,  May  5;  serment  du  jeu  de  paume,  June  20; 

destruction  of  the  Bastille,  July  14. 
i789-'9i,  Constituent  Assembly. 

1 79 1,  Mirabeau  dies. 

1791-92,  Legislative  Assembly. 

1792,  War  with  Austria  and  Prussia;  abolition  of  monarchy,  Sept.  21. 
i792-'95,  National  Convention. 

1793,  King  executed  Jan.  21,  queen  Oct.  16,  Com.  of  Public  Safety 

begins  Ap.  6. 
I793~'4»  Robespierre  and  the  Terror. 

1794,  Robespierre  executed  July  27  [the  9th  of  Thermidor,  hence 

' Thermidorians '  as  name  of  those  who  take  him  off]. 

1795,  The  Dauphin  [Louis  XVII]  dies  June  8;  Napoleon  quells  the 

Babeuf  mob  in  Paris,  Oct.  5. 

2  The  Constituent  had  most  unfortunately  passed  a  self-denying  ordi- 
nance which  forbade  any  of  its  members  to  sit  in  this.  Also  no  one  who 
had  been  a  member  of  the  legislature  within  two  years  could  serve  as  king's 
minister. 

8  Which  the  Mountain  opposed,  to  distract  ministry  and  king,  and 
when,  after  defeat  in  the  field,  Louis  exchanged  obnoxious  ministers  for 
those  still  more  obnoxious,  riot  and  blood  resulted.  Among  the  most  vio- 
lent insurgents  were  500  young  soldiers  from  Marseilles,  recently  come  to 
Paris.     From  them  the  Marseillaise,  whose  refrain : 

Aux  arms,  citoyens!  Formez  vos  batallons! 

Marchons!  Marchons!  qu'un  sang  impur  abrieuve  nos  sillent. 

4  In  this  sat  Tom  Paine,  the  quondam  American  pamphleteer.  The 
Englishman,  Dr.  Priestly,  was  elected  but  declined  serving.  Paine  voted 
nay  on  the  question  of  executing  Louis. 

6  On  the  Terror,  June  1,  1793-July  27,  1794,  see  Ternaux,  Hist,  de  la 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  379 

Terreur,  Taine,  bk.  iv,  chaps,  xi,  xii,  bks.  v  sqq.,  Blanc,  vols,  x,  xi,  ch.  iv. 
Pitt  was,  and  by  many  still  is,  believed  to  have  instigated  these  excesses 
in  order  to  make  revolution  odious,  v.  Sybel  doubts.  The  victims  to  the 
Terror  during  its  420  awful  days  are  computed  at  4000,  at  least  900  being 
women  and  children. 

6  1792  was  the  year  I,  and  it  began  on  Sept.  22,  the  autumnal  equinox 
and  the  day  after  the  abolition  of  monarchy.  The  three  months,  of  30 
days  each,  next  following  this  date  were  Vendhmiaire  [vintage-month], 
Brumaire  [fog-month],  Frimaire  [frost-month].  The  next  three,  begin- 
ning 90  days  later,  were  Nivbse  [snow-month],  Pluvibse  [rain-month], 
Ventose  [wind-month].  The  next  three,  beginning  180  days  from  Sept. 
22,  were  Germinal  [bloom-month],  Floreal  [flower-month],  Prairidi 
[meadow-month].  The  last  three,  beginning  270  days  from  Sept.  22, 
were  Afessidor  [harvest-month],  Thermidor \  [hot-month], Fructidor  [fruit- 
month].  This  calendar  has  been  Englished  thus:  1st  quarter,  Wheezy, 
Sneezy,  Freezy;  2nd  quarter,  Slippy,  Drippy,  Nippy;  3d  quarter,  Showery, 
Flowery,  Bowery;  4th  quarter,  VVheaty,  Heaty,  Sweety.  Three  '  decades ' 
a  month  took  the  place  of  the  four  weeks,  and  in  each  the  days  were  to 
be  Primidi,  Duodi,  Tridi,  Quartidi,  Quintidi,  Sextidi,  Septidi,  Octidi, 
Nonidi,  and  Decadi.  Every  Decadi  was  to  be  a  day  of  rest.  The  five 
supplementary  days  to  fill  out  the  year  were  called  sans-cullotides. 

7  Rotteck  and  Welcker's  Staatslexicon,  s.  v.  '  Frankreich,'  has  a  good 
brief  account  of  these  revolutionary  constitutions.  There  are  many  col- 
lections of  the  texts.  This  second  constitution  never  went  into  effect. 
The  third  one,  that  of  the  year  III,  introduced  an  executive  Directory  of 
5  members,  and  a  Legislature  consisting  of  a  Senate  or  Council  of  250 
Elders  with  power  of  revision,  and  a  lower  Council  of  500  with  initiative, 
%  of  both  Councils  to  be  elected  from  the  members  of  the  Convention. 
It  was  this  limitation  which  occasioned  the  Babeuf  riot  of  Oct.  5,  1795, 
put  down  by  Napoleon.     Fleury,  Babeuf  et  le  Socialisme,  Stephens  I,  vii. 

8  Blanc,  vol.  xi,  ch.  vii,  bk.  xiii. 

9  Improving  the  finances  by  substituting  for  the  assignats  [§  12,  n.  4], 
'  mandats '  [each  one  of  which  formed  a  direct  title  to  a  given,  limited 
quantity  of  land],  suppressing  Babeuf  on  the  one  hand  and  royalist  ris- 
ings on  the  other,  and  winning  glorious  and  unprecedented  victories  in 
foreign  war  [§§  17,  18]. 


380  THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


§  16    King  and  Emigrants 

Michelet,  Pricis,  chaps,  vi-ix.  Sarah  Tytler,  Marie  Antoinette.  Gower,  Last  days 
of  do.  Sybel,  Correspondence  of  do.  [Kl.  h.  Schr.,  II].  Arneth,  Brie/wechtel  der 
M.  Antoinette. 

Early  in  the  struggle  most  nobles,  shorn  of  privileges 
and  distinction  and  feeling  no  longer  under  obligation 
to  France,  'emigrated.'  Not  content  with  this  many 
of  them  exerted  themselves  to  secure  an  invasion  of 
France  by  foreigners  to  restore  the  monarchy.  By  this, 
in  the  eyes  of  France  and  under  strict  construction 
of  the  law  in  fact,  they  became  traitors.1  Should  the 
king  side  with  these  as  urged  by  his  queen,  brothers 
and  court,2  or  with  France  ?  For  long,  under  Mira- 
beau's 3  influence,  he  pursued,  honestly  we  can  scarcely 
doubt,  the  latter  course,  accepting  the  constitution  and 
repeatedly  swearing  the  civic  oath.  Had  he  possessed 
ability  and  decision  as  well  as  honesty  and  kindly  feel- 
ing, he  might  possibly  have  kept  at  the  head  of  the  move- 
ment, prevented  reform  from  becoming  revolution,  and 
erected  in  France  a  sound  constitutional  monarchy.  To 
such  a  work  Louis  XVI  was  unequal.  The  Assembly's 
high  tone,  and  especially  its  severe  measures  toward  the 
clergy,  embittered  him  and  inclined  him  more  and 
more,  despite  constant  indecision,  which  was,  doubt- 
less wrongly,  construed  as  hypocrisy,  to  cast  in  his 
lot  with  the  emigrants.  He  corresponded  with  them, 
attempted  flight 4  to  their  camp,  and  invoked  aid  from 
the  monarchs5  of  Europe,  all  which  was  regarded  at 
Paris  as  treason.  Special  incitements  to  severe  pro- 
cedure against  him  were  (1)  his  numerous  vetoes6  of  the 
Assembly's  decrees,  (2)  his  dismissal  of  the  Girondist 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  38 1 

ministry,  Roland,  Dumouriez  and  their  colleagues,  (3) 
the  attitude  of  Marie  Antionette,7  known  to  have  a  con- 
stant understanding  with  emigrants  and  hostile  courts, 
(4)  conventions  between  the  sovereigns  of  Austria  and 
Prussia  looking  toward  intervention  in  French  affairs, 
and  (5)  the  actual  invasion  of  France  by  the  Duke  of 
Brunswick  with  an  army  of  foreigners  and  traitors. 
Repulse  of  this  army  emboldened  the  republicans  to 
proclaim  defiance  of  Europe  by  summoning  the  king  to 
trial.  Six  hundred  and  eighty-three  out  of  the  seven 
hundred  and  twenty-one  voices  in  the  Convention  de- 
clared him  guilty,  but  the  death  sentence  passed  by  a 
majority  of  only  one.8 

1  Because  by  international  law  a  nation's  identity  or  personality  does 
not  change  with  its  form  of  government.  The  king  and  many  of  the  emi- 
grants could  not  have  fully  appreciated  this.  Woolsey,  International  Law, 
has  good  discussions  of  the  international-legal  questions  connected  with 
the  Revolution. 

3  Court  and  royal  family  early  and  almost  entirely  went  over  to  the 
emigrants. 

3  Mirabeau,  dying  in  1 791,  was  the  last  man  able  to  influence  the  king 
in  the  right  direction.  He  was  in  the  better  condition  to  do  this  in  that 
his  own  temper  in  his  last  days  was  less  radical  than  in  '89.  Had  he  lived 
things  might  have  proceeded  more  happily.     See  Stephens,  I,  xiv. 

4  Carlyle  has  a  powerful  description  of  this  attempt,  vol.  ii,  bk.  iv 
[Tauchnitz  ed.].     Cf.  Stephens,  I,  xv. 

6  From  those  of  Germany,  Prussia,  Russia,  England  and  Sweden. 
This  after  accepting  the  constitution.  He  requested  them  to  keep  his 
invitation  secret,  yet  assured  them  that  they  would  be  warring  not  with 
the  nation  but  with  a  faction. 

6  The  king's  veto  power  had  been  placed  in  the  constitution  against 
great  opposition,  and  the  rabble  regarded  his  use  of  it  malfeasance  in 
office  if  not  downright  treason.  They  dubbed  him  Monsieur  Veto,  and 
sang: 

'  Monsieur  Veto  avait  promts 
D'etre  fidele  a  sa  patrie, 
Mais  il  y  a  manque 
Ne  faisons plus  cartie.' 


382  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

7  She  hi  a  similar  way  was  called  Madame  Veto : 

'Madame  Veto  avait promts 
Defaire  tgorger  tout  Paris, 
Mais  son  coup  a  manqui, 
GrAce  a  nos  cannoniers.' 

8  The  Girondists  earnestly  sought  to  save  Citizen  Capet,  as  he  was  now 
known,  Vergniaud  making  on  his  behalf  an  impassioned  plea.  The  ver- 
dict was  procured  by  the  influence  of  the  mob.  The  minority  were  for 
banishment  or  imprisonment.  King  and  queen  were  both  very  brave  and 
firm  at  the  last.  Marie  Antoinette,  sentenced,  and  asked  if  she  had  aught 
to  say,  replied:  '  I  was  a  queen, — ye  took  my  crown;  a  wife,  —  ye  slew 
my  husband;  a  mother,  —  ye  robbed  from  me  my  children.  Naught  is 
left  me  but  my  blood :  take  it  and  end  my  agony  as  quickly  as  ye  can.' 
Madame  Elizabeth,  the  king's  sister,  was  also  executed.  All  power  in  the 
state  now  passes  from  Gironde  to  Mountain,  at  the  same  time  that  both  a 
civil  and  a  foreign  war  impend  [preceding  §]. 


§  17  Europe  and  the  Republic 

Morris,  vii-xi.     Sorel,  L' Europe  et  la  Rev.  Franqaise.    Michelet,  Precis, 
chaps,  ix,  xi-xiii.     Blanc,  vol.  iv,  bk.  iv,  ch.  i,  bks.  vii,  x. 

Most  other  nations  were  from  the  beginning  hostile 
to  the  new  movement  in  France.  Abuses  similar  to 
those  which  had  there  evoked  rebellion  were  general, 
and  holders  of  privilege  everywhere  feared  overthrow 
should  the  revolt  spread.  In  the  execution  of  Louis, 
monarchs  felt  themselves  at  once  insulted,  defied  and 
threatened.  It  was  worse  when,  in  face  of  that  inter- 
national law  which  the  Legislative  Assembly  had  rebuked 
the  powers  for  disregarding,  new  France,  constituting 
itself  a  propaganda  of  democracy,  set  out  to  establish 
this  over  all  Europe.  Emperor  Leopold  II,1  brother  of 
Marie  Antoinette,  by  his  circular  of  July  6,  1791,  so- 
licited a  declaration  on  the  part  of  other  sovereigns 
that  they  would  defend  Louis  from  the  Assembly.  The 
king  of  Prussia  joined  him  in  repeating  this  invitation, 


THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION  383 

from  Pillnitz  in  August  of  the  same  year,  and  the  next 
February  these  rulers,  in  spite  of  Louis's  public  assur- 
ance that  he  accepted  the  constitution,  removing  all 
semblance  of  just  pretext  for  intervention,  formed  a 
league  to  impose  upon  France  the  old  government  by 
force.  The  pacific  Leopold  died  on  March  i,  1792,  and 
his  son  Francis  was  more  aggressive.  Austria's  ulti- 
matum in  April  was  of  the  nature  of  a  command  to 
France  to  reinstate  privilege  and  to  restore  the  church 
lands.  Prussia  soon  joins  Austria,  Sardinia  arms.2 
France  becomes  indignant,  and  Louis,  in  the  hands  of 
his  Girondist  ministry,  cannot  but  declare  war  (April 
20,  1792).  The  republican  campaign  of  1792  begins 
unfavorably  but  ends  with  enormous  victories,  which 
leave  Belgium  and  most  of  the  empire  left  of  the  Rhine 
in  French  hands.  Other  governments  had  thus  far 
held  back,  but  this  startling  enlargement  of  French  and 
of  republican  sway,  and  especially  the  fate  of  the  king, 
rouses  all  Europe,3  with  armies  comprising  200,000  men, 
to  attack  the  Republic.  Even  England  now  draws  the 
sword,  Pitt  at  last  yielding  to  the  growing  conservative 
clamor,  becoming  till  his  death  soul  as  well  as  brain  to 
the  allied  foes  of  France.  During  most  of  1793  the 
Republic  is  unfortunate,  still  this  year  too  ends  with 
sweeping  successes.4  Gigantic  armies  are  equipped, 
led  by  marshals  like  Pichegru,  Moreau,  Jourdain  and 
Hoche.  The  winter  of  1794-5  sees  Holland  con- 
quered5 and  the  entire  left  bank  of  the  Rhine  from 
Basle  made  French.  Tuscany  wills  peace  early  in  1795, 
Prussia5  next,  Spain  soon  after.  England,  Austria  and 
Sardinia  yet  remain  firm,  but  Napoleon's  astounding 


384  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

Italian  campaigns  of  iyg6-'7s  quiet  Sardinia  and  force 
Austria  to  the  Peace  of  Campo  Formio,  October  17, 
1797,  thus  extending  the  dominion  of  the  Republic 
over  all  Northern  and  Central  Italy.  Pitt  too  seeks 
peace  but  the  Directory  declines. 

1  Emperors  Joseph  II  and  Leopold  II  were  both  sons  of  Maria  Theresa, 
brothers  of  Marie  Antoinette.  Leopold  died,  Mch.  1,  1792,  when  Francis, 
his  son,  nephew  of  the  French  queen,  became  king  of  Hungary  and 
Bohemia,  to  be  elected  emperor  the  following  July  3.  More  rash,  he 
issued  in  April,  1792,  his  ultimatum,  demanding  the  status  quo  of  June  23, 
1 789,  i.e.,  the  abolition  of  the  constitution  and  the  revocation  of  all  that 
the  Constituent  had  done.     Fyffe,  I,  i. 

2  But  this  is  not  commonly  reckoned  as  one  of  the  regular  coalitions 
against  France.  Prussia  as  usual  did  Austria's  bidding.  Cf.  Ch.  XI, 
§§  9  sqq. 

8  Except  Sweden  and  Denmark :  the  first  European  Coalition.  Pitt 
had  at  the  outset  tried  to  keep  England  from  taking  part  in  the  war.  The 
English  have  been  the  foremost  European  nation  to  insist  upon  a  people's 
right  to  change  its  form  of  government  at  pleasure,  unhindered  by  its 
neighbors, — a  principle  of  international  law  less  firmly  settled  in  1792 
than  now.  But  it  was  a  principle  even  then.  The  coalition  had  to  seek 
its  formal  justification  for  opposing  France  in  the  doctrine  of  the  balance 
of  power. 

4  Thanks  to  Carnot's  inspiring  genius,  carrying  through  the  general 
levy,  organizing  the  troops  and  selecting  leaders.     Fyffe,  I,  ii. 

6  The  work  of  Pichegru,  who  thus  accomplished  what  Louis  XIV  in 
his  time  could  not.  Holland  becomes  the  Batavian  Republic,  1 795-1806. 
The  other  republics  soon  existing  under  the  presidency  of  the  French 
were  i)  the  Helvetic,  in  Switzerland,  fr.  1798,  ii)  the  Ligurian :  Sardinia 
and  Genoa,  fr.  1797,  iii)  the  Cisalpine:  Milan,  Modena,  Ferrara,  Bologna, 
Romagna,  etc.,  fr.  1797,  iv)  the  Roman,  Rome,  fr.  1798,  v)  the  Partheno- 
paic,  Naples,  fr.  1 799. 

6  The  Peace  of  Basel  [B&sle],  April,  1795. 

7  The  victories  of  Millessimo,  Montenotte,  Lodi,  Castiglione,  Areola, 
Rivoli,  and  Tagliamento.  By  this  Peace  of  Campo  Formio  Austria  ceded 
to  France  Belgium,  the  last  of  the  lands  she  had  received  by  the  marriage 
of  Mary  of  Burgundy  with  Maximilian  I.  See  Ch.  VIII,  §  17,  Ch.  IX, 
§  3,  n.  4,  Fyffe,  I,  iii. 


the  french  revolution  385 

§   18     The  Rise  of  Napoleon1 

Fyffe,  vol.  i.     Lanfrey,  Napoleon  I.     Seeley,  do.    Ropes,  The  First  Napoleon. 
Thiers,  Consulate  and  Empire.    Fauritl,  Last  Days  of  the  Consulate. 

His  first  campaigns  in  Italy  rendered  Napoleon  vir- 
tually dictator  of  France,  giving  him  an  overwhelming 
popularity,  which  even  his  wild  and  disastrous  Egyptian 
expedition,  leaving  the  Republic's  conquests  of  previous 
years  to  be  mostly  lost,  did  not  diminish.  The  not 
difficult  coup  d'etat  of  18th  Bntmaire  on  his  return, 
made  him  First  Consul  and  paved  his  way  to  the  impe- 
rial throne.  This  promotion  of  Napoleon,  with  the 
reactionary,  absolutist  changes  of  constitution  which  it 
involved,  may  be  referred  to  the  :  I  Universal  political 
unrest  in  France,  cry  for  government  that  should  be 
strong  and  stable.  2  Increasing  weakness,  selfishness, 
tyranny  of  the  Directory.  3  Unspent  will  of  the 
French,  satisfiable  only  through  Napoleon,  to  take 
vengeance  upon  Europe  for  having  first  meddled  with 
France's  affairs.  4  Still  vigorous  hatred  of  Bour- 
bonism  and  love  of  freedom,  most  of  his  subjects  view- 
ing Napoleon  even  when  emperor,  as  the  general2  of 
the  Republic,  and  either  not  noticing  his  despotism 
or  condoning  it  as  but  a  temporary  means  to  liberty. 
5  Great  organizing  ability  of  Napoleon  in  civil  things, 
in  time  source  to  the  nation  of  extraordinary  benefits, 
such  as  firm  government,  financial  surplus,  a  thing 
before  unknown,  educational  and  judicial  reforms,  recon- 
struction of  the  church,  and  adornment  of  Paris.  It  is 
to  his  credit  that  Napoleon  furthered  as  well  as  so  fully 
used  the  new  social  vigor  which  abolition  of  privilege 
and  the  promotion  of  the  third  estate  had  brought  the 


386  THE   FRENCH   REVOLUTION 

French  people.  His  rule  at  its  worst  was  incomparably 
superior  to  that  of  the  Bourbons.  6  Unmatched  career 
of  stupendous  victories,  lifting  France  to  the  headship 
of  Europe.  These  victories  were  due  mainly  to  Napo- 
leon's transcendent  military  genius,  partly  to  the  belief 
that  he  represented  liberalism,  partly  to  favoring  con- 
ditions in  Europe.  Except  Wellington  and  Archduke 
Charles  —  and  neither  of  these  was  what  Nelson  was 
upon  the  sea  —  Napoleon's  military  antagonists  were 
not  commanders  of  the  highest  order.  Of  statesmen 
he  feared  Pitt  and  Stein  alone.  Pitt  was  continually 
opposed  at  home,  at  length  supplanted  in  mid-struggle 
by  a  weaker  premier,  who  hastened  to  make  peace. 
Jealousy  and  discord  prevailed  among  the  continen- 
tal rulers.  Hatred  of  Austria  and  of  the  old  empire 
told  powerfully  for  France.  The  Confederation  of  the 
Rhine,3  Napoleon's  most  obedient  servant,  long  fur- 
nished a  large  part  of  his  best  troops.  Prussia  after  a 
first  harmless  dash  held  aloof,  meanly  trading  with 
France  at  Germany's  expense,  till  Austria  was  ruined, 
then  rushed  to  battle  all  unprepared,  to  be  crippled  for 
nought. 

1  i796-'7,  Napoleon's  first  Italian  campaign. 
i798[May]-'9[Oct.],  his  Egyptian  expedition. 

1798,  Battle  of  the  Nile,  May. 

1799,  Second  Coalition   against  France:   by  Austria,  Gt.  Britain, 

Russia,  Naples,  Turkey;  year  of  constant  defeat  for  France; 
Coup  d'etat  Nov.  9  [Brumaire  1 8th],  NAPOLEON  First 
Consul. 

1800,  Napoleon's  '  forty  days'  campaign '  in  Italy;  Battles  of  Marengt 

and  Hohenlinden. 

1 801,  Peace  of  LunSville,  with  Austria. 

1802,  Peace  of  Amiens,  with  Gt.  Britain;    NAPOLEON  CONSUL  FOR 

Life,  August. 


THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION  387 

1804,  Napoleon  Emperor,  May. 

1805,  Third   Coalition,  Great  Britain,  Austria,   Russia,  Sweden; 

Ulm  taken,  Austerlitz  won,  Peace  of  Presburg,  with  Austria; 
Battle  of  Trafalgar,  Oct.  ['  England  expects  every  man  to 
do  his  duty']. 

1806,  Confederation  of  the  Rhine  formed;   end  of  the  Holy  Roman 

Empire ;  Fourth  Coalition,  Great  Britain,  Russia,  Prussia, 
Saxony;  Battles  of  Jena  and  Auerstddt,  Oct.;  Prussia 
crushed;  the  Berlin  Decree. 

1807,  Battle  of  Eylau,  Feb.,  bloodiest  of  all  Napoleon's  victories; 

Peace  of  Tilsit,  July,  with  Prussia  and  Russia;  the  Milan 
Decree,  Nov. 

1809,  Fifth  Coalition,  Gt.  Britain  and  Austria;  Napoleon  defeated 

by  Archduke  Charles  at  Aspern  and  Essling,  May,  but  victor 
at  Wagram,  Ju!y;   Peace  of  Vienna,  Oct. 

1 8 10,  Napoleon  at  the  Acme  of  his  Power. 

181 1,  King  of  Rome  born,  Mch.  20.     See  further,  §  19,  n.  I. 

2  Not  wholly  an  error.  That  Napoleon  was  selfish  and  ambitious, 
unworthy  of  comparison  with  Washington,  and  that  many  of  his  deeds 
after  he  became  powerful  were  indescribably  atrocious  is  most  true. 
1  Lanfrey,  again,  in  our  day  has  finally  demolished  the  Napoleonic  legend, 
and  has  torn  the  mask  from  the  most  astounding  imposter  and  unques- 
tionably the  biggest  liar  in  modern  history,  and  by  his  clear  and  cutting 
evidence  has  reduced  to  its  real  proportions  that  orgy  of  blood  and  arro- 
gance—  the  European  tyranny  of  Bonaparte.'  Harrison.  Still  it  must  be 
admitted  that  Napoleon's  spirit  and  actions  were  eminently  liberal  as  con- 
trasted with  those  of  the  Bourbons  and  of  European  courts  in  general. 
Had  it  been  otherwise  they  would  easily  have  made  and  kept  peace  with 
him.  Ropes  sets  Napoleon's  character  in  a  very  correct  historical  light. 
Seeley  is  less  just,  not  unwilling  but  unable  to  forget  that  he  is  English. 
He  even  attacks  the  world's  estimate  of  Napoleon  as  a  general.  On  this 
point  Ropes  is  as  conclusive  as  he  is  interesting.  His  battle-maps,  the 
best  we  have  ever  seen,  make  Napoleon's  tactics  clear  as  day. 

8  This  began  with  Mainz,  Bavaria,  Wurttemberg,  Baden,  Hessen-Darm- 
stadt,  Berg,  and  Nassau.  Later  all  the  German  Fursten  belonged,  except 
Austria,  Prussia,  Brunswick  and  Electoral  Hesse.  The  Confederation 
sprung  far  more  from  dislike  of  Austria  and  Prussia  than  from  coercion 
by  Napoleon.  See  Ch.  IX,  §  18.  Half  Napoleon's  soldiers  in  Spain  in 
1809  were  Germans,  and  200,000  or  more  of  those  he  led  into  Russia  in 
1 81 2.     South  Germany  has  ever  since  been  much  attached  to  France. 


388  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


§  19    His  Downfall1 

Fyffi,  I,  viii-xi.  Sybel,  in  Kl.  h.  Schr.,  I,  Erhebung  Europas  gegen  Nap.  I.  Saint- 
Amand,  Memoirs  of  Nap.  and  Marie  Louise.  WarUnburg,  Nap.  als  Feldherr, 
a  v.  Forsyth,  Nap.  at  St.  Helena,  3  v.  Gardiner,  Quatre-Bras,  Ligny  and  Water- 
loo.    Vaulabelle,  Water loo-Ligny,    Lecky,  chaps,  xxi,  xxii. 

I  With  increase  of  dominion  Napoleon  lost  whatever 
desire  may  have  inspired  his  earlier  conquests  to  make 
them  further  the  real  interests  of  the  conquered,  giv- 
ing way  to  a  mere  vulgar  lust  for  power.  France  was 
stretched  over  half  Europe,  most  of  the  rest  in  vassal- 
age. These  subject  nations  had  to  fill  the  emperor's 
coffers,  fight  his  battles.  He  made  his  a  family  of 
kings,2  set  up  and  pulled  down  thrones  at  his  whim,  his 
tyranny  goading  minions,  even  relatives,  to  revolt.  2 
This  spirit  and  policy  wrought  against  him  worst  in 
England,  rendering  the  solid  nation,  Whigs  now  even 
more  than  Tories,  his  deadly  foes.  Worse  when,  en- 
raged by  England's  mastery  of  the  seas  and  in  despair 
of  humbling  her  directly,  he  uttered  the  famous  Berlin 
Decree,3  forbidding  all  trade  between  the  continent  and 
British  ports.  Fruits  of  this  were  (1)  Britain's  attempt 
to  blockade  French  Europe,  (2)  the  American  Non- 
Intercourse  Act,  (3)  Wellington's  long,  brilliant  and  at 
last  victorious  fight  for  Spain,4  (4)  new  and  desperate 
hatred  of  French  sway  on  the  continent,  where,  in  spite 
of  persistent  contraband  trade,  the  '  continental  system  ' 
immensely  increased  prices,  and  (5)  the  renewed  and  this 
time  uncompromising  hostility  of  Russia,  leading  to  the 
crushing  Moscow  campaign  which  cost  350,000  men,  and 
depriving  the  emperor  of  the  to  him  so  important  naval 
aid  of  Russia  and  Sweden.    3    But  the  head  continental 


THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION  389 

force  in  the  final  overthrow  of  the  ■  Corsican  Sesostris ' 
was  Prussia,  the  chief  recipient  of  his  hatred  and  abuse, 
which  most  happily  evoked  here  an  entire  new  national 
life.  Stein's  civil  and  Scharnhorst's  military  reforms 
had,  under  the  tyrant's  eye  yet  unnoticed  by  him,  at 
last  raised  Prussia  to  an  eminence  of  power  beyond 
even  that  attained  under  Frederic  the  Great.  Forbid- 
den to  keep  more  than  42,000  men  in  arms,  they  drilled 
first  one  set,  then  another,  till  the  entire  male  popula- 
tion was  army.  Fichte  preached  of  freedom,  poets  like 
Arndt,5  Korner,  Riickert  sang.  The  people  as  one  man 
willed  freedom.  Answering  the  king's  appeal  'An  mein 
Vo/k,'  March  17,  1813,  110,000  men  rallied  to  arms  in 
ten  days,  170,000  more  by  the  end  of  May,  whose 
quality  Napoleon  tested  to  his  sorrow  at  Leipzig,  Ligny 
and  Waterloo.  Wellington  had  to  thank  Bliicher  for 
Quatre-Bras,  Gneisenau  for  Waterloo.6 

1  See  §  18,  n.  1. 

181 2,  Invasion  of  Russia:    Battle  of  Borodino,  Sept.   7;    Moscow 

burned,  Sept.  16-19. 

1 81 3,  Wellington  sweeps  Spain:  Battles  of  Vittoria  and  the  Pyre- 

nees, June;  in  the  North,  Battles  of  Liitzen  and  Bautzen, 
May;  Sixth  and  Last  Coalition,  Gt.  Britain,  Austria, 
Russia,  Prussia,  Sweden;   Battle  of  Leipzig,  Oct.  16-19. 

1814,  Allies   enter   Paris,  Mch.  31;    First  Peace  of  Paris,  May  30; 

Bourbon  Restoration  [Louis  XVIII];  Congress  of  Vienna 
opens,  Sept. 

1815,  The  Hundred  Days:  Waterloo,  June  18;    Napoleon  to  St. 

Helena,  Oct. ;  Second  Peace  of  Paris,  Nov. 
The  defence  by  Wellington  of  the  Torres  Vedras  line  in  Autumn,  1810 
[n.  4],  against  Massena,  'the  favored  child  of  victory,'  was  the  turning- 
point  in  Napoleon's  career.  His  last  decisive  victory  was  before  this,  at 
Wagram,  July,  1809.  Henceforth  downward.  He  no  longer  had  his  old 
skill  and  promptness  in  battle.  At  Borodino  victory  was  in  his  grasp  had 
he  sent  in  the  Guard,  as  all  his  lieutenants  prayed  him  to  do.    Tolstoi, 


390  THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

War  and  Peace,  gives  a  most  interesting  account  of  this  later  phase  of 
Napoleon's  campaigning,  yet  Ropes  is  best  for  military  information  and 
criticism. 

2  Louis  in  Holland,  Jerome  in  Westphalia,  Joseph  in  Naples  first,  then 
in  Spain,  Murat,  Napoleon's  brother-in-law,  taking  Naples.  Napoleon's 
own  son,  the  king  of  Rome  and  duke  of  Reichstadt,  was  acknowledged  as 
Napoleon  II  by  Napoleon  III  on  his  own  rise  to  power.  On  the  Napo- 
leonida,  Westminster  Rev.,  1882,  Brewer,  France,  432. 

8  In  1806,  Nov.  21.  It  paper-blockades  the  British  Isles.  Another  de- 
cree from  Milan,  Dec.  17,  1807,  declares  forfeited  all  vessels  wherever 
found,  proceeding  to  or  from  any  British  port  or  having  submitted  to 
British  search  or  tribute.  This  was  N.'s  '  continental  system.'  British 
Orders  in  Council,  retorting,  declared  illicit  all  commerce  with  the  conti- 
nent. Our  non-intercourse  act  was  a  vain  attempt  to  bring  both  parties  to 
a  better  mind  by  refusing  to  trade  with  them  till  they  revoked  the  obnox- 
ious regulations. 

4  Portugal  defied  Napoleon's  continental  system,  evoking  his  wrath. 
In  conjunction  with  Spain,  he  deposed  the  house  of  Braganza,  1807,  occu- 
pying Portugal  with  20,000  men.  Proceeding  also  to  make  Joseph  Bona- 
parte king  of  Spain,  1808,  the  tyrant  found  the  entire  peninsula  in  arms 
against  him,  backed  by  Gt.  Britain.  In  early  1809  Napoleon  reduces  all 
Spain,  Soult  forcing  back  the  too  small  army  of  Sir  John  Moore,  killed  in 
the  battle  of  Corunna,  Jan.  16.  Sir  Arthur  Wellesley  soon  arriving  with 
20,000  men,  beats  Soult  at  Douro,  May  12,  and  J.  Bonaparte,  Victor  and 
Jourdain  at  Talavera,  July  28.  Soon  280,000  French  reinforcements 
arrive,  and  Wellesley  retires  to  the  Torres  Vedras  line,  to  defend  Portu- 
gal. Advancing  again  in  181 1,  he  pushes  Massena  from  Almeida,  May  6 
[Beresford  beating  Soult  at  Albuera  the  16th],  storms  Ciudad-Rodrigo, 
Jan.  19,  1 81 2,  Badajoz,  Apr.  7,  crushes  Marmont  at  Salamanca,  July  22, 
and  enters  Madrid,  Aug.  12.  Vittoria,  June  21,  181 3,  totally  routs  the 
French  army  and  leaves  the  [now  Marquis  and  even]  Duke  of  Wellington 
free  to  cross  the  Pyrenees.     Fyffe,  I,  viii,  ix. 

6  '  Our  Fatherland,  all  Germany  — 

Who  speak  the  tongue,  our  sons  must  be. 
God  give  us  courage,  will  and  strength 
To  free  it  in  its  breadth  and  length. 
Join  every  heart,  join  every  hand, 
Till  Germany's  one  Fatherland.'  —  Arndt. 

In  Prussia  no  one  did  more  to  rouse  and  maintain  this  stout  spirit  than 
Queen  Louise,  Emperor  William's  mother. 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION  391 

8  Blucher,  by  fighting  at  Ligny,  saved  Wellington's  detachment  at 
Quartre-Bras  from  being  overwhelmed.  Late  in  the  evening  at  Ligny, 
Blucher  fell  insensible,  supposed  dead.  The  vital  question  whether  to  re- 
treat homeward  or  so  as  to  join  Wellington  was  decided  in  favor  of  the 
latter  course  by  Gneisenau,  B.'s  chief  of  staff.  The  arrangement  defeated 
Napoleon  at  Waterloo.  Cf.  Ch.  IX,  §  11,  n.  5,  Gardner,  as  above,  Del- 
brlick,  Leben  Gneisenaus,  2  v.  This  Gneisenau  had  served  in  America  in 
a  regiment  of  Anspach  troops.  On  this  note  and  the  preceding,  cf.  Ch. 
XI,  §  8,  with  notes  and  authorities.    FyfTe,  I,  xi. 


§  20    Results 

Adams,  Democracy  and  Monarchy  in  Fr.     Guizot,  Memoirs  to  Must,  the  H.  of  my 
Time,  4  v.     Treitschke,  '  Freiheit'   in  Aufsaetze.    Ch.  XI  f  f>ost\,  §  9. 

The  Congress  of  Vienna  and  the  Second  Peace  of 
Paris  restored  the  map  of  Europe  to  about  the  form  it 
had  in  1791.1  The  number  of  states  was  much  reduced, 
chiefly  by  the  disappearance  of  ecclesiastical  principali- 
ties. The  Germanic  Confederation  took  the  place  of  the 
empire.  Prussia  was  vastly  increased  in  size.  Bavaria, 
Hannover,  Wiirttemberg  and  Saxony  were  made  king- 
doms, the  first  three  enlarged,  the  last  diminished  to 
half  its  old  size.  These  modifications  however  scarcely 
hint  at  the  radical,  pervasive  and  lasting  changes  which 
the  revolutionary  movement  effected  in  the  political 
condition  of  Europe,  not  a  single  element  of  this  escap- 
ing positive  influence  therefrom.2  The  immediate 
sequel  was  indeed  an  absolutistic  reaction,3  in  France 
itself,  under  Napoleon,  the  restored  Bourbons  and  the 
second  empire ;  also  elsewhere  in  Europe  :  Metternich, 
the  Holy  Alliance,4  absolutism,  striving  for  freedom 
repressed  in  Germany,  Italy  and  Spain.  Yet  the  spirit 
of  liberty  lived  on  in  spite  of  these  efforts  to  suppress 
it,  increasing  in  strength  and  asserting  itself  more  and 


392  THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

more  effectively,  in  France,  under  Louis  Philippe,  the 
Second  Republic  and  the  present  Republic,  the  last 
two  no  new  creations  but  adjourned  sessions  as  it  were, 
of  the  First.  Elsewhere  in  Europe  there  came  oblivion 
of  Metternich  and  his  political  ideas,  the  introduc- 
tion of  constitutions  in  all  the  German  states,  and  the 
rise  of  the  National-Liberal  party  in  Prussia,  which  has 
made  political  unity  in  Germany  at  last  after  so  many 
ages  a  reality.  By  arousing  and  liberalizing  Prussia 
French  republicanism  may  be  said  to  have  twice,  in 
1815  and  1870,  slain  its  worst  foe  at  home,  the  empire. 
Nor  is  the  train  of  causation  starting  from  the  French 
Revolution  exhaustively  conceived  without  remembering 
further  the  (1)  union  of  Italy  under  a  single  govern- 
ment, for  the  first  time  since  Justinian,5  (2)  growth  of 
liberalism  in  England,  partly  out  of  hatred  to  Napoleon, 
partly  from  correct  insight  into  and  true  sympathy  with 
the  French  agitation  at  its  beginning,6  (3)  freedom  of 
the  Spanish-American  republics,  (4)  rise  and  life  of  the 
Democratic  Party  and  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine 7  in  the 
United  States,  (5)  Belgium  and  Greece. 

1  See  Freeman,  Hist'l  Geography,  229  sqq.,  Lodge,  Mod.  Europe,  629 
sqq.  On  the  higgling  and  the  littleness  displayed  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  Ch.  XI,  §  9  and  notes. 

2  '  The  French  Revolution  was  the  work  of  philosophers,  and  it  was, 
compared  with  the  English  Revolution,  a  failure,  and  ended  in  Csesarism, 
that  is,  in  the  government  of  Hell  upon  earth.'  —  Bisset.  Bisset,  of  all 
men,  should  admit  that  it  did  not  end  in  Gesarism.  '  If  there  is  one  prin- 
ciple in  all  modern  history  certain,'  declares  Harrison,  'it  is  this:  That  the 
Revolution  did  not  end  with  the  whiff  of  grape-shot  by  which  Bonaparte 
extinguished  the  dregs  of  the  Convention.'  '  It  would  be  easy  to  show,'  he 
says, '  that  the  last  50  years  of  the  18th  century  was  a  period  more  fertile  in 
constructive  effort  than  any  similar  period  of  50  years  in  the  history  of 
mankind.' 


THE   FRENCH    REVOLUTION  393 

8  Reform  became  and  for  a  time  remained  a  hateful  word  all  over 
Europe.  Louis  XVIII  dated  the  state  papers  of  1814  as  of  the  '  19th  year 
of  our  reign.' 

4  Formed  in  181 5  between  the  monarchs  of  Russia,  Austria  and  Prus- 
sia, joined  later  by  Louis  XVIII,  professedly  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
Christian  religion,  though  it  soon  took  the  form  of  an  absolutist  propa- 
ganda, Metternich's  mightiest  engine  for  putting  down  all  liberal  move- 
ments. 

5  Italy  even  more  than  Germany  took  impulse  toward  freedom  and  union 
from  French  occupancy  and  the  influences  connected  therewith. 

6  Fox  was  prompt  to  declare  his  sympathy  with  the  Revolution  and  be- 
lieved Pitt's  repressive  measures  to  be  of  dangerous  tendency.  This  lean- 
ing of  his  caused  coolness  between  him  and  Burke  when,  in  1 790,  the  latter 
published  his  Reflections.  Many  in  England  hailed  the  Revolution  as  a 
veritable  millennium.  '  What  an  eventful  period  is  this  !  I  am  thankful 
that  I  have  lived  to  see  it;  I  could  almost  say,  Lord,  now  lettest  thou  thy 
servant  depart  in  peace,  for  mine  eyes  have  seen  thy  salvation?  etc.  —  Ser- 
mon by  Dr.  Price,  quoted  in  Burke's  Reflections. 

7  Having  restored  absolutism  in  Spain,  the  Holy  Alliance  contemplated 
aid  to  the  reinstated  monarch  in  recovering  his  American  fiefs.  This 
called  forth  President  Monroe's  'Doctrine'  in  his  message  of  1823,  to  the 
effect  that  we  should  consider  any  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  allied  mon- 
archs '  to  extend  their  system  to  any  portion  of  this  hemisphere  as  danger- 
ous to  our  peace  and  safety,'  and  any  interposition  by  them  to  control 
the  young  American  republics  'as  a  manifestation  of  an  unfriendly  dis- 
position to  the  United  States.'  See  '  Democratic-Republican  Party,'  and 
'  Monroe  Doctrine,'  in  Lalor's  Cyclopaedia. 


SELECT   BIBLIOGRAPHY  TO   CHAPTER  XI 

'Prussia'  [see  lit.],  'Germany,'  and  'Austria,'  in  Encyc.  Brit.  Alison, 
Europe  from  Fall  of  Napoleon,**  8  v.  Tuttle,  Prussia  to  Fred.  Great;** 
do.  under  Fred.  Great,  2  v.  Muller,  Pol.  H.  of  Recent  T.  Fyffe,  H.  of 
Mod.  Europe,*  vol.  ii.  Lodge,  Mod.  Europe.  Duruy,  Temps  Modernes.* 
Lewis,  H.  of  Germany.  Bryce,  chaps,  xix,  sqq.  v.  Treitschke, 
Deutsche  Gesch.  im  XIX  Jahrh.**  [3  v.  out] ;  Zehn  Jahre  deutscher 
Kampfe.  Weir,  Hist'l  Basis  of  Mod.  Europe,  1 760-1 81 5.  Seeley,  L.  and 
Times  of  Stein,**  2  v.  Pertz,  Leben  d.  A/in.  Freiherrn  vom  Stein,  2  v. 
Hausser,  D.  Gesch.  vom  Tode  Fr.  d.  Grossen  bis  zur  Griindung  d.  d. 
Bundes,**  4  v.  Weber,  IVeltgeschichte,  II.  Ranke,  Memoirs  of  Bran- 
denburg and  Hist,  of  Prussia  dg.  XVII  and  XVIII  Cent.,**  3  v.;  XII 
BUcher  preussischen  Gesch.  ;**  Hardenberg,  5  v.  Poschinger,  Preussen 
im  Bundestag**  \_Pub.  aus  den  K. -preussischen  Staatsarchiven,  vols,  xii, 
xiv,  xv,  xxiii :  Eng.  trans,  begun].  Ruge,  Gesch.  unserer  Zeit.  Busch, 
Our  Chancellor.  Flathe  [in  Oncken],  Zeitalter  d.  Restaur ation  u.  Revo- 
lution** 1815— '51.  Lohmeyer,  Gesch.  von  Ost  -  u.  -  West  -  Preussen** 
[from  1881  on:  the  standard].  Isaacsohn,  Gesch.  d. preussischen  Beam- 
tenthums,**  2  v.  Fix,  Territorial-gesch.  d.  Brand.-preussisch.  Staates** 
[with  maps].  Forster,  Neuere  u.  neueste  pr.  Gesch.  Reimann,  Neuere 
Gesch.  d.  pr.  Staates.  Heinel,  Gesch.  Preussens.  Pierson,  Pr.  Ge~ 
schichte.  Lavisse,  Hist,  de  Prusse.  Metternich,  Memoirs,*  4  v. 
Eberty,  Gesch.  d.  preussischen  Staates,  7  v.  Stenzel,  do.,  5  v.  Cosel, 
do.,  8  v.  Droysen,  Gesch.  d.  preussischen  Politik,  14  v.  [to  beginning  of 
7  Years'  W.] ;  Abhandlungen  zur  neueren  Gesch*  Lancizolle,  Gesch.  d. 
Bildung  d.  pr.  Staates*  Klupfel,  Die  deutsche  Einheitsbestrebungen  seit 
fS/j,  2  v.  [All  Histories  of  Germany  and  of  Austria  necessarily  contain 
much  upon  this  Ch.  The  most  accessible  ones  are  named  in  Adams's 
Manual.] 


CHAPTER   XI 

PRUSSIA  AND  THE  NEW  EMPIRE 


§  i     Prussia  in  German  History 

Treitschke,1  vol.  i,  24  sqq.     Droysen,  Abhandlungen.    Sybel,  Deutsch* 
Nation  u.  d.  Kaiserrtich. 

Despite  the  divisive  influences  which  have  operated 
in  the  nature  and  the  history  of  the  German  people, 
they  were  manifestly  destined  for  union  under  a  single 
government,  nor  was  it  properly  credible  even  in  1648 
that  so  bright  a  race  would  forever  continue  the  prey  of 
France  or  of  the  shameful  anarchy  in  which  the  Thirty 
Years'  War  had  left  Germany.2  Relief  required  the 
rise  of  a  political  power  in  resources  the  peer  of  France 
on  the  one  hand  and  of  Austria  on  the  other,  yet  unlike 
Austria  in  being  purely  and  enthusiastically  German. 
Such  a  state  would  needs  be,  like  those  so  efficient  politi- 
cal creations,  the  Hanseatic  League 3  and  the  Teutonic 
Order,4  a  child  of  the  North,  where  the  German  nature 
had  lost  least  of  its  pristine  vigor,  and  it  would  go  forth 
to  impose  its  will  upon  the  effete  South  as  had  of  old 
the  Karlings  and  the  Saxon  emperors.  The  North  had 
carried  through  the  Reformation,  defied  Rome  and 
crushed  Rome's  Spanish-Austrian  defence.  The  powers, 
Saxony,  Anhalt,  the  Palatinate,  which  then  led  had 
indeed  since  dropped  the  scepter,  but  before  the  end  of 


396  PRUSSIA   AND   THE   NEW   EMPIRE 

the  seventeenth  century  another  state  had  grasped  it, 
—  Brandenburg,  soon  to  be  Prussia,  the  one  ordained  to 
fulfil  all  the  conditions  for  founding  the  unity  of  the 
Fatherland  and  introducing  a  new  and  glorious  era  in 
German  annals. 

1  Reference  to  Treitschke  unless  otherwise  indicated  is  to  his  Deutsche 
Geschichte  im  XIX ten  Jahrhunderte. 
a  SeeCh.  IX,  §§  17-19. 
8  See  Ch.  IX,  §  4,  note. 
*  See  Ch.  VII,  §  18,  n.  5. 

§  2     Old  Brandenburg 

Tuttlt,  i,  all.  Ledge,  Mod.  Europe,  ch.  xvii.  Bryce,  sup.  ch.  Carlyle,  Frederic  Gt., 
vol.  i.  Weber,  I,  711  sqq.  Ranke,  Genesis  d.  pr.  Staates;  XII  Bucher,  I,  i; 
Memoirs,  etc.,  bk,  i.    Lancizolle,  as  in  bibliog. 

Karl  the  Great  had  pushed  his  conquests  to  the  Elbe  * 
and  established  the  North  Mark,  now  Altmark.2  Henry 
the  Fowler  conquered  half  or  more  of  Mittelmark,3  the 
land  between  Elbe  and  Oder,  which  in  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, a.d.,  Germans  had  vacated  and  the  Slavic  Wends 
occupied.  After  Henry,  notwithstanding  a  nominal 
succession  of  margraves,  two  centuries  are  a  blank, 
Mittelmark  and  much  of  Altmark  losing  their  German 
character  and  becoming  Slavic  again.  Safe  Branden- 
burg history  begins  with  Albert  the  Bear,4  1139-68,  of 
the  famed  Ascanian  princely  line,  who  in  1 1 34  receives 
the  Mark,  till  then  mere  part  of  the  great  Saxon  duchy, 
as  an  immediate  fief  of  the  empire.  From  11 34  the 
state  passes  through  :  i  The  Ascanian  period,  till  1320. 
Brandenburg,  the  name  from  1 1 70,  is  enlarged  to  the 
eastward  and  Neumark  organized  beyond  the  Oder, 
ii  The  Bavarian  or  Wittelsbach,  to  1371,  the  Mark  hav- 


PRUSSIA    AND   THE   NEW    EMPIRE  397 

ing  escheated  to  Emperor  Ludwig  of  Bavaria  by  the 
extinction  of  the  Ascanian  house.  Misrule,  war  and 
disorder,  Neumark  lost  for  a  time  to  the  Poles,  yet 
Brandenburg  made  an  electorate  by  the  Golden  Bull  in 
1356.  iii  The  Luxemburg,  to  1415,  change  this  time 
occurring  partly  by  negotiation,  partly  by  conquest. 
Misrule  and  rebellion  continue,  Neumark  sold  to  the 
Teutonic  Order,  iv  The  Hohenzollern.  Elector  Sigis- 
mund  having  become  emperor  in  1410,  bargained  his 
dignity  and  land  to  Frederic5  of  Hohenzollern,  the 
family  which  to-day  rules  Brandenburg-Prussia  and  the 
new  German  Empire.  Prosperity  now,  Neumark  re-pur- 
chased, territory  acquired  in  all  directions,  indivisibility 
of  the  Mark  decreed  in  1473.  Protestantism  was  intro- 
duced in  1539,  and  by  Elector  John  Sigismund's  mar- 
riage with  the  heiress  of  Preussen,  that  vast  duchy 
became  incorporated  with  Brandenburg  in  161 8.6 

1  See  Ch.  V,  §  2.  Karl  Great  founded  Halle  on  the  Saale,  Magdeburg 
and  Biichen  as  defenses  of  his  frontier  against  the  Wends.  Hamburg  sub- 
sequently replaced  Biichen  in  this  office. 

2  Alt-  Mittel-  and  Neumark  are  divisions  still  in  use  in  Prussia,  the  first 
south  and  west  of  the  Elbe  from  Magdeburg  across  to  Priegnitz,  the 
second  between  the  Elbe  and  the  Oder,  and  the  third  east  of  the  Oder, 
north  and  south  of  the  Warthe. 

8  On  Henry  the  Fowler,  Ch.  V,  §  7.  This  victorious  campaign  of  his 
against  the  Wends  occurred  in  the  winter  of  926-'7.  '  Brandenburg '  is  a 
modification  of  the  Wendic  '  Brannibor,'  at  first  a  town  on  the  lower  Havel. 

4  So  called  from  the  cognizance  upon  his  shield.  Cf.  Ch.  V,  §  17  and 
note  4. 

6  Frederic  VI  in  the  line  of  the  Hohenzollern  Burggraves  of  Niirnberg. 
He  received  Brandenburg  in  return  for  the  influence  and  money  used  by 
him  in  securing  Sigismund's  election  as  emperor.  The  title  '  Hohenzol- 
lern,' which  this  family  subsequently  received  and  still  wears,  is  from  their 
ancestral  seat,  on  the  heights  of  Zollern  in  the  Swabian  Alps.     Emperor 


39^  PRUSSIA    AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

William  II  is  the  25th  ruler  of  the  line.     On  the  early  history  of  the 
Hohenzollerns  in  Brandenburg,  Tuttle,  iii. 

6  See  Ch.  V,  §  17,  n.  4,  Ch.  VII,  §§  16,  n.  I,  18,  n.  5.  Preussen  was 
under  Polish  suzerainty  however  till  the  Peace  of  Oliva,  1660.  Cf.  §  4, 
and  n.  4.  On  Preussen's  early  hist.,  Ranke,  XII  Biicker,  I,  2,  3,  La- 
visse,  55-145.  The  original  Preussen  were  not  a  Teutonic  people  at  all 
hut  Lithuanians.  '  It  is  a  curious  freak  of  history,  not  unlike  that  which 
1  as  given  the  British  name  to  the  Teutonic  and  Gallic  inhabitants  of  these 
[British]  islands,  that  has  transferred  the  name  of  this  vanishing  race  to 
the  greatest  of  modern  German  states.'  —  Bryce. 


§  3     Its  Rise  to  Statehood 

Tuttle,  ii-iv.    Treitschke,  vol.  i,  25  sqq.    Droysen,  Politik,  pts.  i,  ii.    Ranke, 
XII  BiicAer,  11;  Memoirs,  etc.,  bk.  i.     Lancizolle ,  as  in  bibliog. 

It  was  natural  that  the  Brandenburgers,  a  composite 
race  Saxon  at  basis,  steeled  and  sharpened  by  colonial 
life,  should  excel  their  neighbors  in  war.  Equally 
natural  was  their  backwardness  in  civilization,1  whose 
progress  among  them  had  thrice,  under  Albert  the  Bear, 
at  the  Hohenzollern  accession  and  after  the  Thirty 
Years'  War,  to  begin  from  a  dead  halt.  Still  the  Mark 
early  developed  political  ambition  and  performance. 
The  Ascanians  designed  a  state  that  should  rule  the 
whole  North,  a  thought  whose  realization  the  attain- 
ment of  the  electorship  began.  Frederic  I  led  the 
Fiirsten  in  demanding  reform  for  empire  and  church, 
Albert  Achilles  in  reducing  nobles  and  cities  to  obedi- 
ence, thus  initiating  a  bold  monarchical  policy.  End 
to  private  wars  2  and  indivisibility  of  territory  were  here 
ordained  earlier  than  in  the  empire  at  large.  Govern- 
ment was  indeed  feebler  after  the  third  Hohenzollern,3 
letting  nobles  and  cities  grow  insolent  and  Saxony  and 
the  Palatinate  lead  in  the  Reformation  and  the  Thirty 


PRUSSIA   AND    THE   NEW    EMPIRE  399 

Years'  War.  Yet  the  last  event  fell  in  precisely  the 
half  century  which  opened  Brandenburg's  greatness, 
i  Cleve,  Mark  and  Ravensberg4  not  only  enlarged  the 
state,  gave  it  promising  foothold  in  the  West  and  en- 
riched and  diversified  its  culture,  but  as  outposts  of 
protestantism  toward  Spain,  France  and  Rome,  rushed 
it  into  the  vortex  of  great  European  politics,  ii  The 
adoption  of  Calvinism  as  the  court  religion  while  the 
Brandenburgers  were  Lutheran  and  many  of  the  new 
subjects  catholic,  necessitated  here  a  religious  liberty 
worthy  the  Reformation,  which  made  Brandenburg 
henceforth  the  head  protestant  state,  iii  Possession  of 
Preussen,  which  was  secularized  church  land 5  and  out- 
side the  empire,6  rent  Brandenburg  forever  from  the 
papacy  and  forced  it  into  international  relations  on  its 
own  account. 

1  '  Never  did  the  church  grow  a  saint  from  the  sand  of  these  northern 
marches.  Rarely  sounded  a  minnesong  at  the  rude  court  of  the  Ascanian 
margraves.  The  diligent  Cistercians  of  Lehnin  looked  more  for  fame  as 
good  farmers  than  for  the  crowns  of  art  and  learning.'  —  v.  Treitschke. 

2  On  the  imperial  peace,  Ch.  VIII,  §  17.  In  Brandenburg  the  very 
first  Hohenzollern  ordained  a  Landfrieden. 

8  The  Hohenzollern  electors  of  Brandenburg  were  Frederic  I,  I4I5~'40; 
Frederic  II,  I440-'70;  Albert  Achilles,  i470-'86;  John  Cicero,  i486-'99; 
Joachim  I,  1499-1535;  Joachim  II  [who  introduced  Lutheranism],  1535 
-'71;  John  George,  i57i-'98;  Joachim  Frederic,  1598-1608;  John  Sigis- 
mund,  l6o8-'i9;  George  William,  i6i9-'40;  Frederic  William,  the  Great 
Elector,  i640-'88;  Frederic  III,  1688-1701  [announces  himself  King 
Frederic  I  of  Prussia  in  1701  and  rules  as  such  till  1 713,  still  elector  no 
less  than  before,  as  were  all  Prussia's  kings  till  the  empire  ended,  in  1806]. 

4  See  Ch.  IX,  §  7.  Cleve  had  been  a  duchy,  Mark  and  Ravensberg 
counties.  Note  that  •  Mark '  is  in  this  case  a  proper  name.  Vienna  and 
Madrid  regarded  themselves  defeated  when  these  districts  passed  to  a 
protestant  power,  which  thus  came  so  near  to  Cologne,  Rome's  tower  of 
ftrength  in   the  empire.     'The  young  state  embraced  upon  its   24,000 


400  PRUSSIA   AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

square  miles  of  territory  nearly  all  the  contrasts,  topographical,  ecclesiasti- 
cal and  socio-political,  which  were  filling  the  empire  with  vocal  strife.  It 
bestrode  the  German  lands  with  spread  legs  like  the  Colossus  of  Rhodes, 
planting  its  feet  upon  the  threatened  marches  of  the  Rhine  westward  and 
of  the  Memel  eastward.' —  v.  Treitschke.  This  position  in  West  Germany 
also  brought  Brandenburg  into  the  important  alliance  with  the  House  of 
Orange  [Holland]  in  its  war  against  Louis  XIV,  i672-'8  [§  4  and  notes]. 

*  It  was  a  Hohenzollern  Grand  Master,  Albert  of  Brandenburg,  who  in 
1525  by  Luther's  advice  secularized  the  territory  of  the  Order,  Decoming 
duke  of  Prussia  under  Polish  suzerainty.  The  entire  duchy  consisted  of 
secularized  ecclesiastical  land,  and  was  the  largest  tract  of  the  kind  which 
the  church  had  possessed.  Albert  was  excommunicated  and  put  to  the 
ban  of  the  empire.  Incorporation  of  this  estate  of  course  placed  Branden- 
burg forever  at  feud  with  Rome.     Ch.  VI,  §  18,  n.  5. 

6  Many  writers  seem  not  to  understand  that  the  union  of  old  Preussen 
with  Brandenburg  did  not  bring  this  territory  into  the  empire.  It  at  no 
time  formed  part  of  the  empire. 

§  4    The  Great  Elector 

Tuttle,  iv-vii.     Lewis,  ch.  xxi.    Ranke,  Memoirs,  etc.,  bk.  i;  XII Bucher,\\\. 
Lavisse,  195-244.     Droysen,  Politik,  III,  a,  3. 

The  new  status  took  shape  in  the  time,  i640-'88,  of 
the  justly  so  called  '  Great  Elector,'  who  forms  with 
Frederic  II  and  Bismarck  the  immortal  triumvirate  of 
epoch-makers  in  Prussian  history.  Less  conscientious 
or  benevolent,  he  was  in  war  and  diplomacy  comparable 
with  either  of  his  kinsmen,  Gustavus  Adolphus  or  Fred- 
eric Henry  of  Orange.2  Fehrbellin3  and  Warsaw4 
proved  him  a  master  in  strategy,  tactics  and  valor.  His 
combined  assurance  and  address  in  the  Congress  of 
Westphalia,  mean  and  vacillating  as  his  father's  course 
had  been  in  the  War,  secured  him  Far  Pomerania  and 
the  ecclesiastical  states  of  Magdeburg,  Camin,  Minden 
and  Halberstadt.  Fore  Pomerania  he  won  splendidly 
with  the  sword,6  though  forced  by  the  treachery  of  his 


PRUSSIA   AND   THE    NEW   EMPIRE  401 

allies  to  retrocede  it  subsequently.  By  playing  off 
Sweden  and  Poland  against  each  other  he  made  himself 
over  Preussen  a  fully  sovereign  prince.  Best,  he  greatly 
consolidated  his  straggling  realm,  which  partly  excuses 
his  absolutism  in  roughly  displacing  rude  parliamentary 
institutions  by  personal  rule.  Worthful  as  well  were  the 
new  life,  the  modern  and  independent  German  spirit 
which  he  infused.  He  mocked  at  the  empire's  effete 
mediaevalism,  single-handed  braved  Louis  XIV,  and 
severely  taught  his  diets  and  subjects  not  to  look 
abroad6  for  aid.  His  wise  policy  in  religion  exalted 
Brandenburg  as  the  protestant  Holy  Land.  While  each 
of  the  other  states  in  the  empire  made  some  one  con- 
fession dominant,  barely  tolerating  dissenters,  this  gave 
the  three  an  absolute  parity,7  at  the  same  time  offering 
full  freedom  of  faith  to  all  subjects.  Religious  refugees 
thronged  in,  Jews  and  Bohemian  Brethren  from  the 
Austrian  lands,  twenty  thousand  Huguenots  from 
France.  At  Frederic  the  Great's  death  nearly  a  third 
of  Prussia's  population  were  descendants  of  such  immi- 
grants. 

1  Very  many  of  the  acts  of  this  great  man  cannot  be  defended.  Tuttle 
well  shows  this,  rebuking  the  weak  adulation  of  Prussian  panegyrists.  But 
T.  does  not  enough  take  into  account  the  benefits  that  arose  from  unifying 
the  different  parts  of  Prussia,  and  the  importance  to  this  of  the  elector's 
absolutist  course.  Perusal  of  v.  Treitschke  and  Tuttle  together  gives  a 
very  correct  idea.  The  diets  gotten  rid  of  by  the  elector  were  not  of  a 
popular  nature  and  the  weal  of  the  people  was  furthered  rather  than 
lessened  by  their  fate. 

2  Gustavus  was  his  uncle,  Frederic  Henry  his  great-uncle  and  his  father- 
in-law.  William  III  of  England  was  his  second  cousin  and  also  nephew 
to  his  first  queen,  Louise  of  Orange.  On  his  death-bed  the  Great  Elector 
planned  with  William  the  campaign  to  England  which  was  to  make  him 
king  the  next  year.     The  Great  Elector  should,  in  estimates  of  his  spirit  as 


402  PRUSSIA    AND   THE   NEW    EMPIRE 

a  ruler,  be  credited  with  this  crusade  against  absolutism.  He  fought  abso- 
lutism too  in  Louis  XIV. 

8  In  1675,  during  Louis  XIV's  war  with  Holland  [Ch.  X,  §  2,  n.],  the 
Swedes,  allies  of  Louis,  invaded  Brandenburg.  The  elector  hastened 
from  the  Rhine,  where  he  commanded  the  allies,  routed  the  Swedes  in  this 
battle,  against  great  odds,  and  rapidly  wrested  from  them  every  foot  of  the 
land  which  the  P.  of  Westphalia  [Ch.  IX,  §  17]  had  left  them,  including 
Stettin,  the  'virgin'  city,  never  conquered  before.  Meantime  Holland, 
Spain  and  the  emperor  had  hastened  to  make  peace  [Nymwegen,  1678] 
with  Louis,  leaving  Brandenburg  alone  to  fight  France  and  Sweden. 
Hence  in  the  P.  of  St.  Germain,  1679,  the  elector  was  forced  to  give  back 
to  Sweden  all  that  he  had  taken  save  a  small  strip  on  the  right  Oder-bank. 
In  signing  this  humiliating  treaty  he  is  said  to  have  cried  out :  Exoriare 
aliquis  nostris  ex  ossibus  ultor  [Aeneid,  IV,  625],  which  'ultor'  modern 
Prussians  see  in  Bismarck.  The  elector  showed  his  usual  sagacity  in 
yielding  Fore  Pomerania  instead  of  letting  Louis  keep  the  Prussian  Rhine- 
lands,  as  it  would  be  easier  by  and  by  to  displace  the  Swede  than  the 
Frenchman. 

4  In  1656,  the  decisive  battle  in  the  long  strife  of  John  Casimir,  king 
of  Poland,  for  the  Swedish  throne.  The  elector  fought  on  Sweden's  side 
but  refused  to  follow  up  the  victory.  Poland  was  humbled,  and  the  death 
in  1660  of  the  victorious  Swedish  king,  Charles  Gustavus,  saved  Branden- 
burg from  Sweden's  vengeance.  The  Peace  of  Oliva,  1660,  confirmed  the 
elector's  full  sovereignty  in  Preussen. 

8  See  n.  3.  In  spite  of  this  loss  the  realm  was  nearly  trebled  in  size 
under  John  Sigismund  and  the  Great  Elector,  increasing  from  11,440 
square  miles  to  32,208.  The  Great  Elector  established  Prussian  colonies 
in  Africa  [short-lived],  and  a  small  but  efficient  navy. 

6  The  diet  of  Preussen  sought  aid  from  Poland  [declining  to  recognize 
the  transfer  of  sovereignty],  that  of  Brandenburg  from  Austria,  that  of 
Cleve  from  Holland.  The  elector  cowed  all  of  them  into  submission,  the 
last  general  diet  of  Brandenburg  being  in  1653.  He  did  not  formally 
annihilate  them.  They  were  simply  ignored  and  not  summoned.  On  his 
cruel  treatment  of  Rhode  and  Kalkstein  in  Preussen,  Tuttle,  189  sqq.,  has 
excellent  remarks. 

7  The  earliest  state  in  Europe  to  do  this.  It  was  first  matter  of  necessity, 
then  became  and  has  remained  a  principle  of  Prussian  statecraft.  The 
Huguenots  came  before  and  at  the  revocation  of  the  Nantes  edict,  1685. 
They  furnished  a  large  fraction  of  Prussia's  intellectual  aristocracy  for  a 
century.     Brandenburg  resounded  with  the  hymn, 


PRUSSIA    AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE  403 

'  Dein  Volk  das  sonst  im  Finstern  sass, 
Von  Irrthum  gam  umgeben, 
Dasfindet  hier  nun  sein  Gelass 
Und  darf  in  Freiheit  leben.' 

§  5     The  First  Two  Kings 

Tuttle,  vii-xi.     Treitschke,  vol.  i,  35-48.     Ranke,  Memoirs,  etc.,  bk.  ii; 
XII  Biicher,  IV- VI.     Droysen,  Politik,  IV,  1-3. 

Frederic  I  and  Frederic  William  I  were  not  attrac- 
tive characters,  the  one  weak  and  vain,  the  other  savage, 
mean  and  narrow,  and  neither  was  inspired  with  the 
slightest  foregleam  of  Prussia's  destiny.  Yet  partly 
through,  partly  in  spite  of  them  the  land  continued  to 
advance  in  all  the  elements  of  able  statehood.  Its  pro- 
motion to  the  rank  of  a  kingdom J  increased  its  moral 
and  political  weight  in  Europe.  Much  territory2  was 
acquired,  including  Stettin  and  a  goodly  reach  of  Baltic 
coast.  Public  education  was  improved,  the  Academy 
of  Arts  and  of  Sciences3  established,  and  the  intel- 
lectual movement  well  begun  which  was  to  make  Prus- 
sia instead  of  the  catholic  South  the  German  centre  for 
art  and  letters.  In  particular :  i  Prussia's  hegemony 
in  the  corpus  evangelicorum.  was  emphasized  and  con- 
firmed by  her  bold  and  constant  opposition  to  Louis 
XIV,  and  by  Frederic  William's  welcome  to  the  Salz- 
burg exiles 4  with  intervention  on  their  behalf.  2  Her 
military  establishment  was  enlarged  and  improved,  the 
splendid  corps  left  by  the  Great  Elector  having  slowly 
but  surely  grown  to  be  the  best  disciplined  and  every 
way  most  formidable  body  of  troops  in  Europe  outside 
of  France.5  3  More  significant  than  all  was  the  inner 
political  strength  which  the  state  had  acquired.  The 
government  if  absolute  was  paternal.     The  Mercantile 


404  PRUSSIA   AND    THE   NEW    EMPIRE 

System6  had  been  introduced  and  allodial  substituted 
for  the  feudal 7  tenure  of  land.  A  Prussian  feeling  verg- 
ing toward  enthusiasm  had  percolated  through  the 
remotest  sections  of  the  population.  Prussia  was  more 
and  more  thought  of  at  home  and  abroad  as  no  longer  a 
member  of  the  empire  but  as  its  peer.8  Economy  kept 
its  exchequer  well  filled,  and  an  exact  and  laborious 
administration  9  was  founding  the  unrivalled  fame  which 
the  Prussian  civil  service  still  enjoys. 

1  In  1701,  Elector  Frederic  III  becoming  King  Frederic  I.  He  lived 
and  ruled  till  171 3.  The  succession  of  Prussian  raonarchs  since  has  been : 
Frederic  William  I,  I7i3~'40;  Frederic  II  [the  Great],  i740-'86;  Fred- 
eric William  II,  i786-'97;  Frederic  William  III,  1797-1840;  Fred.  Wm. 
IV,  '4&-'6l;  Wm.  I,  '6i-'88;  Fred.  Ill,  '88;*  Wm.  II,  '88-.  Pope  ignored 
the  change  to  kingdom  and  the  papal  state-calendar  a  hundred  years  later 
knew  only  margraves  of  Brandenburg.  The  Saxon  elector  became  king 
of  Poland,  1697,  but  had  to  turn  catholic  therefor.  This  made  the  king  of 
Prussia  more  visibly  the  foremost  protestant  magnate. 

2  Frederic  I  obtained  Quedlinburg,  Tecklenburg,  Mors  and  Lingen  in 
West  Germany,  and  Neufchatel  in  Switzerland.  Prussia  was  now  about  at 
Bavaria's,  Saxony's  or  Hannover's  level  of  power.  Frederic  Wm.  I 
secured  a  part  of  Guelders  [Holland]  at  the  Peace  of  Utrecht,  1713,  and 
at  that  of  Stockholm,  1720,  Fore  Pomerania  to  the  River  Peene,  with 
Stettin  and  the  islands  Usedom  and  Wollin. 

8  The  Academy  of  Arts,  1696,  the  Acad,  of  Sciences,  Leibnitz  at  its 
head,  in  1700.  Frederic  I  and  still  more  his  Queen,  Sophie  Charlotte, 
truly  befriended  these  institutions  for  higher  culture.  Not  so  Frederic 
Wm.  I,  who  was  a  boor.  Yet  he  was  the  monarch  who  first  made  elemen- 
tary education  compulsory  in  Prussia. 

4  Driven  from  the  Salzburg  district  by  the  cruelty  of  the  catholic  arch- 
bishop, Baron  Firmian,  1 731.  Nearly  the  same  inhumanity  was  used  as  in 
Bohemia  in  i620-'2i  [Ch.  IX,  §  11].  The  king  of  Prussia  very  boldly 
expostulated,  at  the  same  time  offering  the  exiles  all  facilities  for  settlement 
in  his  lands.  Tuttle,  411  sqq.  Goethe's  Hermann  and  Dorothea  has  im- 
mortalized this  pathetic  history,  as  Longfellow's  Evangeline  has  that  of  the 
French  exodus  from  the  Basin  of  Minas. 

5  '  They  had  held  Eugene's  right  on  the  day  of  Blenheim,  had  looked 

*  From  March  9  to  June  15,  when  he  died. 


PRUSSIA   AND    THE    NEW   EMPIRE  405 

destruction  calmly  in  the  face  at  Cassano,  had  stormed  over  and  over  again 
the  deadly  trenches  of  Malplaquet,  had  indeed  campaigned  all  over 
Europe  in  the  service  of  foreign  states.' — Tuttle. 

6  Of  which  Colbert,  the  great  minister  of  Louis  XIV,  was  the  foremost 
champion.  The  central  ideas  of  the  system  were  (i)  to  discourage  im- 
ports, making  each  land  as  far  as  possible  dependent  on  its  own  resources 
alone,  and  (ii)  to  export  only  for  money,  and  in  all  ways  to  provide  the 
country  with  the  greatest  possible  hoard  of  money.  Incidental  to  (i)  was 
the  furtherance  of  home  manufactures.  On  this  see  Adam  Smith's  Wealth 
of  Nations,  bk.  iv. 

7  See  Ch.  VI,  §  7,  Tuttle,  391  sq.  This  left  the  feudal  system  exactly 
as  before  except  as  to  the  relations  between  the  king  and  his  immediate 
vassals.     The  same  change  occurred  in  England  under  Charles  II. 

8  Under  Frederic  I  Prussia  was  still  the  humble,  dutiful  servant  of 
Austria  and  the  empire.  The  rivalry  of  the  two  states  begins  under  Fred. 
Wm.  II.  He  had  learned  of  Austria's  treachery  and  charged  his  son  to 
avenge  him.  For  this  purpose  he  left  him  a  well-filled  treasury  and  an 
army  of  85,000  men.  Prussia  was  then  not  higher  than  the  12th  European 
state  in  population  or  territory,  yet  4th  in  military  power.  Frederic  the 
Great  secured  the  privilege  de  non  appellando,  freeing  Prussia  from  all 
connection  with  imperial  courts. 

9  v.  Treitschke  believes  that  no  statesman  of  modern  times,  Napoleon  I 
and  Freiherr  von  Stein  aside,  has  equalled  Frederic  William  I  as  an 
organizer. 

§  6     Frederic  the  Great 

Lewis,  chaps,  xxii,  xxiii.  Carlyle,  Frederic  the  Gt.  Macaulay,  Essay  on  do.  Duruy, 
Temps  Modernes,  ch  xv.  Treitschke,  vol.  i,  49-70.  Ranke,  Memoirs,  etc.,  bks. 
iii  sqq.;  XII  Biicher,  VII  sqq.    Droysen,  Politik,  V  sqq.     Tuttle,  Pr.  under  F.  Grt. 

Now  came  to  the  throne  a  genius,  who  saw  as  no 
Hohenzollern  before,  the  vanity  of  the  old  empire,  the 
hypocrisy  and  despotism  of  Austria,  the  irrepressible 
conflict  between  it  and  Prussia,  the  latter's  mission  ulti- 
mately to  form  the  Fatherland  anew,  and  the  certainty 
that  force  would  be  required  to  accomplish  this.  Fred- 
eric's life-work,  fully  successful,  was  to  enlarge  and 
exalt  Prussia  and  to  secure  to  her  full  place  and  recog- 


406  PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

nition  among  the  great  powers.1  Important  incidental 
results  of  it  were :  I  The  initial  humiliation 2  of  Aus- 
tria. 2  Strength  to  freedom  of  religious  confession 
still  menaced  by  Rome.  Parity  of  faiths  in  the  empire 
must  have  remained  a  myth  so  long  as  only  Austria  and 
France  contested  the  supremacy.  Frederic  was  thus 
the  Maccabasus3  of  protestantism,  his  victories  filling 
pope  and  Jesuits  with  despair.  3  Preparation  for  a 
more  worthy  central  government  in  Germany  by  and  by. 
Frederic  deemed  it  as  yet  too  early  to  crush  the  empire, 
but  wished  to  germanize  and  reform  it,  by  transferring 
its  crown  to  Bavaria4  and  incorporating  its  smallest 
states  with  the  larger  and  efficient  ones.  In  this  he 
failed,  through  the  craft  of  Austria  and  the  might  of 
conservative,  particularist  and  ecclesiastical  prejudice. 
But  he  made  Germany  ashamed  of  its  petty  govern- 
ments and  of  foreign  domination.  He  shook  confidence 
in  Austria,  increased  it  in  simple  Deatschthum.  In  his 
wars  Frederic  represented  the  German  national  con- 
sciousness. He  fought  for  German  interests,  not  for 
foreign.  His  miraculous  victories  were  deeds  of  Ger- 
man valor,  and  stimulated  the  national  pride  to  its 
depths.  Mainly  to  this  was  due  the  sense  of  German 
national  unity  which  has  shaped  all  European  history 
since,  and  also  the  incomparable  intellectual  revival 
which  raised  up  Kant,  Klopstock,  Lessing,  Herder, 
Goethe  and  Schiller.  Another  benign  influence  of  this 
memorable  reign  was  that  it  lifted  the  level  of  life  at  all 
German  courts,  inspiring  rulers  with  new  sense  of  duty, 
new  regard  for  the  public  weal.5  Austria  itself  was 
regenerated  by  it. 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE  407 

1  Silesia  was  the  only  territory  secured  to  Prussia  by  his  wars,  but  dur- 
ing the  reign  east  Friesland,  part  of  Mansfeld,  West-Preussen,  except 
Danzig  and  Thorn,  and  the  so-called  Netz-district  of  Poland  proper  became 
Prussian,  the  last  two  being  added  by  the  first  partition  of  Poland,  1772. 
We  have  no  space  for  a  full  account  of  Frederic's  wars  but  must  refer  to 
Carlyle,  Oncken,  Zeitalter  Fried,  d.  Grossen,  2  v.,  Wolf,  Oesterreich  un- 
ter  M.  Theresia,  etc.,  Arneth,  Gesch.  Maria  Theresias,  10  v.,  Due  de 
Broglie,  Fred.  II  and  Maria  Theresa,  2  v.,  Droysen,  Abhandlungen,  Bieder- 
mann,  Deatschland im  xviiiten  Jahrh.,  Raumer,  Contributions  to  H.,  vol.  ii, 
Duncker,  A  us.  d.  Zeit  Fr.  d.  Grossen  u.  Fr.  Wms.  III.  Schafer,  Gesch.  d. 
7  j'dhr.  Krieges,  2  v.,  is  the  standard  on  the  7  Years'  W.  Griinhagen  of 
Breslau,  an  able  pupil  of  Droysen,  has  written  on  the  First  Silesian  W., 
and  is  writing  on  the  Second.  With  the  above  may  be  consulted  Koser, 
Fr.  d.  Grosse  als  Kronprinz,  Oncken,  Beitrage  zu  neueren  Gesch.,  and 
v.  Sybel's  Zeitschrift  for  1859  and  1886.  Cf.  also  Adams,  Manual,  273  sq. 
Frederic  began  the  First  Silesian  W.,  1 740-'2,  upon  his  own  account,  but 
after  the  League  of  Nymphenburg  against  Austria,  May,  1 741,  on  the 
part  of  France,  Spain,  Bavaria,  Saxony  and  Prussia,  it  lapses  into  the 
general  W.  of  the  Austrian  Succession,  to  break  emperor  Charles  VI's 
Pragmatic  Sanction,  honor  the  Salic  law,  and  place  Charles  Albert  of 
Bavaria  against  Maria  Theresa  in  possession  of  the  Austrian  crown.  In 
1742  Frederic  recedes  from  this  alliance  and  makes  peace  with  Maria 
Theresa  on  condition  of  retaining  Silesia,  but  seeing  Austria  victorious  and 
allying  herself  with  Sardinia  and  Saxony,  he  in  1746  joins  France  and 
Bavaria  again  and  begins  the  Second  Silesian  W.,  i744-*5,  against  Austria, 
Saxony,  England  and  Holland,  another  phase  of  the  W.  for  the  Austrian 
Succession.  This  question  is,  however,  settled  by  Charles  Albert's  death 
in  Jan.,  1745,  and  in  Dec.  Prussia  concludes  with  Austria  the  Peace  of 
Dresden,  still  retaining  Silesia.  The  other  powers  fight  till  the  Peace  of 
Aix-la-Chapelle,  1748.  Maria  Theresa  had  no  intention  even  now  of  per- 
manently relinquishing  her  lost  provinces,  yearly  gathering  resources  and 
forming  alliances  for  a  fresh  struggle,  which  came  in  the  terrible  Seven 
Years'  War,  oftener  called  by  the  Prussians  the  Third  Silesian,  i756-'63. 
In  1755  Austria  had  succeeded  in  entirely  isolating  Frederic,  but  in  June 
of  that  year  the  French  and  English  in  America  opened  hostilities  [French 
and  Indian  War,  1755— '63]],  which  withdrew  England  from  the  French- 
Austrian-Russian  alliance  into  one  with  Frederic.  It  aided  him  compara- 
tively little.  In  1757  Austria,  France,  Russia  and  Sweden  even  arranged 
to  partition  Prussia.  Notwithstanding  miracles  of  generalship  and  valor 
by  Frederic,  his  officers  and  his  men,  on  fields  like  Rossbach,  Leuthen  and 


408  PRUSSIA    AND    THE   NEW   EMPIRE 

Minden,  they  must  have  succumbed  but  for  the  death  of  Elizabeth  of 
Russia,  which  transferred  the  forces  of  that  nation  [Peter  III]  to  Prussia's 
side.  The  Peace  of  Hubertsburg,  Feb.  15,  1763,  closed  Frederic's  great 
military  career,  though  he  took  part  in  the  nearly  bloodless  war  over  the 
Bavarian  Succession,  i778-'9. 

2  A  century  earlier  north  Germany  required  30  years  to  beat  Austria 
with  France's  and  Sweden's  aid.  Now  Frederic  almost  alone  did  it  thrice 
in  succession,  occupying  in  all  less  than  half  that  time.  Had  both  sides 
been  alone,  the  weakness  of  Austria  in  the  comparison  would  have  been 
more  apparent  still.  Of  the  850,000  men  computed  to  have  perished  in 
the  7  Yrs.'  W.,  about  180,000  fell  in  Prussia's  service,  and  her  population 
decreased  in  these  years  by  half  a  million. 

8  So  was  he  named  by  English  dissenters.  The  pope  on  his  side  sent 
a  consecrated  hat  and  sword  to  the  Austrian  Marshal  Daun,  who  had  acci- 
dentally beaten  Frederic  once  at  Hochkirch. 

*  See  n.  1.  This  was  Frederic's  hope  in  taking  part  in  the  War  for  the 
Austrian  Succession.  Austria's  spirit  had  not  changed  since  the  30  Years' 
War.  She  still  fought  for  Rome,  still  summoned  hordes  of  foreigners  to 
shed  protestant  and  German  blood  on  imperial  soil.  Yet  how  fully  he 
conceived  Prussia's  German  mission  as  this  later  unfolded,  or  deserves 
credit  for  truly  German  patriotism,  is  matter  of  doubt.  Prussian  writers 
probably  overestimate  his  merit  in  this  regard;  Bryce,  406  sq.,  underesti- 
mates it  rather. 

6  Frederic  the  Great's  absolutism  is  not  for  a  moment  to  be  compared 
with  the  unqualified  selfishness  of  a  Louis  XV.  It  was  a  prime  maxim 
with  him  that  government  exists  only  for  the  good  of  the  governed,  that 
the  monarch  is  only  the  foremost  servant  of  the  state.  This  view  spread 
to  his  adorers,  the  princes  and  princelings  of  the  empire.  Joseph  II,  who 
succeeded  Maria  Theresa  in  Austria,  was  an  enthusiastic  imitator  of  the 
great  Prussian,  introducing  beneficent  reforms  of  all  sorts  in  church  and 
state,  to  which  Austria's  tenacity  of  life  against  Napoleon  was  greatly 
owing.  Strange  to  say,  some  of  the  best  ideas  of  the  French  Revolution 
itself  proceeded  from  Frederic  the  Great. 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE  4O9 


§  7    Napoleon's  Heel 

Lewis,  ch.  xxiv.  Treitschke ,  bk.  i,  2.  Weber,  II,  496-516.  Sorel,  '  Decadence  de 
la  Prusse  apres  Fred.  IP,  Rev.  des  deux  Mondes,  Jan.,  1883.  Ranke,  An- 
sprung,  u.  Beginn  d.  Rev.-Kriege,  1791,  '2;  Hardenberg,  bks.  i-iii.  Seeley,  Stein, 
pt.  ii.     Segur,  Hist.,  etc.,  of  Reign  of  Fred.  Wm.  II,  3  v. 

But  for  the  present  the  rest  of  Germany  partook  these 
benefits  more  than  Prussia,  which  even  before  Frederic's 
death  began  to  decline.  The  wars  had  left  it  in  dis- 
tressing poverty,  which  the  Mercantilism 1  persisted  in 
by  the  king  increased  faster  than  his  Spartan  economy 
diminished  it.  In  administration  he  was  not  his  father's 
peer.  Even  the  army  fell  off  in  organization  and  morale. 
If  defects  in  the  judiciary  were  reformed,  evils  equally 
important  were  neglected  in  other  fields.  The  aristoc- 
racy was  petted,  the  serfs  not  freed.  Government  was 
too  paternal,  too  personal.  Wont  to  supervise  every- 
thing himself  the  king  created  no  power  of  initiative  or 
automatism  in  state  or  officials.  Worst,  his  successor, 
Frederic  William  II,  was  a  pigmy,  during  whose  years 
upon  the  throne  the  very  foundations  fixed  by  the  Great 
Frederic  were  undermined,  Prussian  national  pride  laid 
low,  the  lead  surrendered  again  to  Austria.  There  was 
failure  in  diplomacy.2  Cant  in  religion  was  rewarded,3 
candor  persecuted.  The  last  two  partitions  4  of  Poland 
were  against  Prussia's  and  the  world's  conscience,  and 
troubled  the  realm  with  a  refractory  ethnic  element, 
both  Slavic  and  catholic.  When  the  French  Revolution 
opened  everything  favored5  the  complete  subjection  of 
Austria  to  Prussia,  but  the  precious  chance  was  lost. 
Fierce  as  the  king  was  to  quash  the  French  Republic, 
one  dash  of  its  raw  army  forced  him  to  peace,  with  the 


4IO  PRUSSIA   AND   THE    NEW   EMPIRE 

loss  of  trans-Rhenish  Prussia  entire.  In  all  its  dealings 
with  Napoleon  till  the  merited  fate  came,  the  Berlin 
court  showed  indolence,  indecision,  insincerity.  And 
so  far  as  Frederic  William  III,  stripped  of  half  his  lands 
and  mulcted  a  half  billion  francs,  at  last  excelled  his 
father  he  owed  it  to  patriotic  goading  by  Stein  and  the 
people.6 

1  See  §  5,  n.  6. 

2  By  Austria,  e.g.,  at  the  Congress  of  Reichenbach,  1790,  where  Leo- 
pold II  artfully  led  Frederic  Wm.  to  give  up  promising  schemes  of  acqui- 
sition in  the  Austrian  Netherlands  [Belgium]  in  return  for  a  barren 
promise  that  Austria  would  push  its  Turkish  conquests  no  further.  Fred. 
Wm.  wasted  money  in  a  foolish  campaign  against  Holland  in  1797.  How 
stupid  too  his  zeal  for  Polish  land,  his  ready  relaxation  of  grip  upon  his 
beautiful  trans-Rhenish  domains!  The  10  yrs.  from  the  P.  of  Basel,  1795, 
are  among  the  darkest  in  Prussian  history :  economy,  order,  justice  gone 
from  the  administration,  army  weakened  by  ill  discipline  and  a  disaffected 
Polish  element,  treasury  exhausted,  no  patriotism  among  upper  classes. 

8  Wollner,  Frederic  Wm.'s  minister,  devoted  to  reaction  in  theology, 
uttered  an  edict  in  1 788,  abrogating  the  freedom  of  thought  and  the  press 
so  perfect  under  the  great  Frederic,  commanding  the  clergy  whether 
believing  them  or  not,  to  propound  the  ancient  doctrines  approved  at 
court,  under  penalty  of  deposition  or  worse.  This  law  was  set  aside  in  the 
next  reign. 

4  The  first  partition,  under  Frederic  the  Great,  1772  [Ch.  X,  §  3,  n.  6] 
gave  Prussia  land  and  [German]  population  which  naturally  belonged  to 
her,  and  was  thus  relatively  justified.  Not  so  the  second  and  third.  But 
the  internal  disorders  of  Poland  furnished  a  fair  excuse  even  for  these. 

6  The  Revolution  would  end  France's  alliance  with  Austria,  the  latter's 
troops  were  engaged  in  a  far  campaign  against  the  Turks,  the  Czarina  was 
in  close  treaty  with  Prussia.  Nor  would  attack  then  upon  Austria  neces- 
sarily have  weakened,  it  might  greatly  have  strengthened,  Germany's 
position  in  face  of  Napoleon  subsequently,     v.  Treitschke,  vol.  i,  109. 

8  Just  so  Bryce,  409  sq. 


prussia  and  the  new  empire  41 1 

§  8     Resurrection 

Lewis,  chaps,  xxvii-xxx.  Ranke,  Hardenberg,  bk.  iv.  Treiischke,  bk.  i,  2-5.  Weber, 
II,  541-61.  Ducoudray,  Hist.  Contemporaine,  196-400.  Weir,  ch.  v.  Periz, 
Stein.     Seeley,  do. 

In  the  process  of  isolating,  tantalizing  and  grinding 
Prussia  Napoleon  was  as  adroit  as  the  Berlin  court  was 
dull.1  Yet  the  very  brilliancy  of  this  success  begot  his 
defeat  at  last.  In  Prussia  as  nowhere  else  his  sway  was 
pure,  crushing  burden,  his  purpose  to  enslave  trans- 
parent, and  as  he  could  not  here  kill  out  the  German 
and  national  spirit,  irresistible  reaction  resulted.  Prus- 
sia, chief  sufferer,  not  Austria,  became  the  leader  in 
Germany's  redemption,  thus  gaining  incalculable  and 
permanent  vantage  as  the  centre  of  Deatschthum.  The 
years  from  1806  to  18 12  are  morally  the  grandest  in  all 
Prussian  history.  The  efficient  organizers  of  the  revi- 
val were  Stein  and  Scharnhorst,  two  of  the  patriotic 
Germans  who  had  flocked  to  Prussia  from  other  states.2 
Stein,  believing  that  domestic  bondage  must  be  ended 
before  the  foreign  could  be,  set  out  to  rebuild  socially 
from  the  bottom.  The  serfs  were  freed,  nobles'  privi- 
leges and  many  monopolies  abolished,  self-government 
restored  to  cities,  the  trades  removed  from  guild-domi- 
nation.3 Public  burdens,  distributed  more  justly,  were 
borne  more  cheerfully.  Scharnhorst  reformed  the  army 
in  like  manner,  putting  into  it  native  Prussians 4  only, 
to  be  treated  humanely  and  honorably,  with  arms  and 
drill  simple  and  efficient.  His  plan  of  filling  and  drill- 
ing the  permitted  quota  and  then  emptying  it  to  give 
place  to  more  recruits,5  turned  the  whole  male  popula- 
tion into  trained  soldiery,  wherein  merit  and  service, 


412  PRUSSIA    AND   THE   NEW    EMPIRE 

not  social  position,  secured  promotion.  In  these  and 
other  ways  inspired  patriotism  came  to  pervade  clergy, 
universities,  schools6  and  literature,  as  well  as  the 
masses  of  the  people.  For  years  restrained  only  with 
difficulty,  after  Vittoria  and  Napoleon's  retreat  from 
Moscow  the  awful  zeal  for  freedom  burst  all  bonds. 
Led  by  men  like  Blucher,  Gneisenau,  Yorck"  and  Biilow 
Prussia's  soldiers  sought  the  front  on  every  battle-field, 
fighting  like  tigers.  Their  spirit  was  contagious,  and 
the  oppressor  crossed  the  Rhine  chased  by  huge  armies 
from  states  which  yesterday  acquiesced  or  even  gloried 
in  French  rule  as  a  blessing. 

1  Partly  her  own  pride,  partly  Napoleon's  management  led  Prussia  to 
take  so  mean  and  crooked  a  course  that  other  nations  were  offended  at  her. 
Her  fall  awoke  little  pity.  Too  ready  to  go  Austria's  ways  before  the  war, 
now  in  the  hour  of  woe  to  all  Germany,  alliance  with  Vienna  was  shunned 
as  deadly.  Had  Prussia  cooperated  in  the  Austerlitz  campaign,  1805, 
Napoleon  might  have  been  crushed.  Not  even  the  high-handed  seizure 
of  Hannover  by  the  French  in  1803  could  rouse  the  sleepy  Frederic  Wm. 
III.  In  1805  he  even  accepted  from  Napoleon  the  Hannover  so  recently 
plucked  from  England,  his  ally.  Erection  of  the  Rhein-Bund  and  the 
restoration  of  Hannover  to  Eng.  awoke  him,  yet  without  duly  arousing 
him.  Tilsit  stripped  him  of  all  his  kingdom  west  of  the  Elbe  and  also  of 
all  the  Poland  acquired  by  the  second  and  third  partitions.  Cf.  Bryce, 
407  sq. 

2  Stein  was  a  Nassauer,  Scharnhorst  a  Hannoverian.  Besides  these, 
Blucher  and  Fichte  of  the  men  influential  in  Prussia  at  this  crisis  were 
from  outside.  Scharnhorst  was  wounded  May  2,  1813,  in  the  battle  near 
Liitzen,  yet  continued  active  and  made  his  wound  fatal,  June  28. 

8  Under  the  Great  Elector  most  towns  gave  up  the  subsidy-system  of 
paying  taxes,  granting  him  a  permanent  excise.  This  made  him  independ- 
ent. As  nobles  and  prelates  still  paid  the  Bede  [Bitte,  'request']  or 
subsidy,  sympathy  between  them  and  the  burghers  died  out.  Royal  tax- 
officers  became  the  main  officials  of  towns.  Nobles  paid  their  taxes  by 
grinding  their  serfs.  In  1807  Stein  promulgated  an  edict  abolishing  serf- 
dom, and  also  the  legal  distinction  of  classes,  establishing  freedom  of  ex- 


PRUSSIA    AND   THE   NEW   EMPIRE  413 

change  in  land  and  free  choice  of  occupation  by  all.  In  1808  he  issued 
another,  restoring  self-government  to  the  cities,  only  the  head  official  of 
each  to  be  appointed  by  king,  from  three  nominees  presented  by  the 
citizens.  Stein's  reforms,  so  far  as  they  went,  were  almost  exactly  those 
of  the  opening  French  Revolution  [Ch.  X,  §§  II,  12J.  He  based  his 
acceptance  of  office  on  the  condition  that  there  should  be  no  more  an 
irresponsible  cabinet,  but  responsible  ministers,  to  counsel  the  king  and  be 
his  executive  agents.  His  intention  was  ultimately  to  give  Prussia  Eng- 
land's parliamentary  system,  but  his  work  was  cut  short.  A  letter  of  his 
[Seeley,  pt.  iv,  ch.  v]  betraying  his  wish  to  rid  Germany  of  the  French 
yoke  reached  Napoleon,  and,  to  relieve  Prussia  from  a  conflict  which 
would  then  have  been  premature,  he  gave  up  his  place  as  Prussian  minis- 
ter, Nov.  24,  1808,  fleeing  first  to  Austria,  then  to  Russia.  Napoleon  in  a 
sounding  manifesto  denounced  to  the  world  '  a  man  by  the  name  of  Stein ' 
as  a  stirrer  of  revolt  against  the  French  empire.  It  was  Stein  who  induced 
Czar  Alexander,  when  Russia  was  invaded,  to  ignore  Napoleon's  offers  to 
negotiate.  Hardenberg  took  up  Stein's  reforms  in  1810,  giving  each 
peasant  the  fee  simple  of  part  of  the  estate  to  which  he  had  belonged. 
Seeley's  Stein,  pts.  iii-v. 

4  I.e.,  as  private  soldiers,  the  system  of  employing  mercenaries  being 
abandoned. 

6  See  Ch.  X,  §  19,  Seeley's  Stein,  pt.  iv,  ch.  iv. 

6  The  educational  reforms  of  Wm.  v.  Humboldt  had  established  the 
Prussian  school  system  on  its  present  basis,  and  in  1809  the  University  of 
Berlin  was  founded. 

7  On  Blucher  and  Gneisenau,  Ch.  X,  §  19  and  n.  6.  Droysen  has  an 
able  Life  of  Yorck  \_Leben  d.  Fcldmarschalh  Grafen  York  von  Wartenburg, 
3  v].  Yorck's  son  died  fighting  in  the  streets  of  Paris,  being  among  the 
first  to  enter  after  Waterloo.  Surrounded  by  French  chasseurs  and  bidden 
to  surrender, '  My  name  is  Yorck '  \ich  heisse  Yorck~\  was  all  he  would  reply, 
rushed  upon  them  and  fell. 


§  9    The  Continental  Gerrymander  of  1815 

Treitschke ,  bk.  ii,  i.     Weber,  II,  553  sqq.    Ranke,  Hardenberg.    Flatht,  as  in  bibliog. 
Weir,  ch.  v.    Pertz,  Stein,  vol.  ii.     Seeley,  do.,  pt.  viii.    Alison,  ch.  xxvii. 

The   old    empire1    and    Napoleon's   gone,   Germany 
needed  a  new  constitution,  preparation  of  which  was 


414  PRUSSIA    AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

the  chief  work  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  famous  for 
so  many  reasons.2  Prussia  had  brought  from  the  war 
new  zeal  for  a  united  Fatherland,  and  her  envoys  came 
to  Vienna  to  urge  a  national  policy.  In  vain.  Prussia's 
sacrifices  had  awakened  jealousy  instead  of  gratitude. 
The  heads  of  the  Rhein-Bnnd  states  in  particular, 
'  satraps  of  Napoleonism,'  entered  the  Congress  sworn 
to  weaken,  'in  the  interest  of  German  freedom,'  the 
only  state  that  had  shown  power  and  will  to  defend 
Germany.  Herein  they  were  at  one  with  Metternich, 
master  spirit  of  the  Assembly,  who  possessed  the  art  to 
bring  all  to  his  view.  His  policy  favored  (i)  death  to 
revolutionary  ideas,  (2)  aid  to  the  Turks  against  Russia, 
an  aim  which  gave  him  England  and  Hannover,  and  (3) 
division  and  impossibility  of  union  in  both  Italy  and 
Germany.3  Prussia  was  to  be  made  as  small  and  weak 
as  possible,  even  France  to  be  favored  rather  than  she, 
and  a  cordon  of  separate  but  not  too  feeble  states  to 
remain  in  Central  and  South  Germany,  kept  satellites 
to  Austria  by  assiduous  courting.  This  plan  in  the 
main  prevailed  and  is  mirrored  in  the  loose  constitution  4 
of  the  Confederation  which  the  Congress  established. 
Of  the  Prussian  diplomatists  present,  none  of  them  able, 
Hardenberg  led,  but  weakened  Prussia's  suit  by  at  first 
siding  with  Metternich's  Turkish  policy  against  Russia, 
and  by  insisting  upon  the  size5  rather  than  upon  the 
quality  and  position  of  the  acquisitions  he  demanded. 
But  if  Prussia  gained  in  territory  less  than  she  hoped, 
fortunately  the  increment  which  she  did  receive  pre- 
served her  unity,  while  her  moral  advantage  from  the 
great  struggle,  in  elevation  of  national  enthusiasm  at 


PRUSSIA   AND   THE   NEW   EMPIRE  415 

home  and  in  the  public  opinion  of  the  world,  exceeded 
that  of  any  other  continental  power. 

1  The  Holy  Roman  Empire  ended  in  1806,  when  emperor  Francis  II 
renounced  his  crown.  It  had  amounted  to  nothing  since  1801,  date  of 
the  Peace  of  Luneville.  Francis  had  already  in  1804  announced  himself 
as  emperor  Francis  I  of  Austria,  in  which  character  he  remained  till  his 
death  in  1835.  The  more  liberal  spirits  in  the  congress  wished  to  restore, 
modified,  the  ancient  empire,  but  Metternich's  decisive  influence  was 
thrown  against  this.     Cf.  §  12,  n.  2. 

2  Here  originated  the  system  of  relegating  the  weightiest  affairs  of 
European  politics  to  the  great  powers  for  decision,  which  has  since  be- 
come a  recognized  part  of  international  law.  A  lively  sense  now  first 
began  to  be  manifested  in  Europe's  common  interests.  Certain  very  valu- 
able forms  and  rules  for  international  intercourse  date  from  this  congress. 
Many  new  agreements  were  here  set  in  train  for  the  free  navigation  of 
great  rivers  having  an  international  character.  '  The  business  policy  of 
the  18th  century  had  as  its  fundamental  principle  that  one  nation's  gain  is 
another's  loss.  Now  for  the  first  time  a  European  treaty  appealed  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  new  political  economy,  that  the  alleviation  of  commerce  is 
for  the  common  interest  of  all  peoples.'  —  v.  Treitschke.  The  powers 
united  to  do  away  with  the  slave  trade.  New  attention  was  directed  to 
the  rights  of  foreigners  resident  in  any  land.  In  a  word  this  congress 
was  an  epoch  in  international  law,  and  private  international  law  may  be 
said  to  have  had  here  its  birth,  as  public  at  the  Congress  of  Westphalia 
[Ch.  IX,  §  17,  n.  7]. 

8  Cf.  Ch.  X,  §  20.  Italy  was  divided  nearly  as  in  1795,  before  the 
Napoleonic  invasion,  Venetia  and  Lombardy  being  united  into  a  kingdom, 
subject  to  Austria.  Germany  was  restored  to  nearly  the  figure  of  1803, 
incorporating  the  petty  principalities,  counties  and  baronies  in  the  larger 
states.  Prussia  obtained  the  valued  Posen-district  of  Poland,  its  eastern 
and  southeastern  line  running  as  now,  also,  in  the  west,  all  that  had  been 
lost  by  the  Peaces  of  Tilsit  and  Basel,  and  beyond  the  Rhine  about 
Cologne  considerably  more,  viz.,  the  electoral  territories  of  Cologne  and 
Treves,  the  city  of  Aix-la-Chapelle,  and  pieces  of  Luxemburg  and  Lim- 
burg.  Pomerania  and  about  half  of  Saxony  also  passed  to  Prussia.  The 
entire  Bund  now  constituted  embraced  38  states  in  all :  I  empire,  Austria; 
5  kingdoms,  Prussia,  Bavaria,  Wiirttemberg,  Saxony  and  Hannover;  1  elec- 
torate, Hessen-Kassel  [the  term  now  of  course  purely  conventional  and 


4l6  PRUSSIA    AND    THE   NEW    EMPIRE 

devoid  of  its  old  meaning] ;  7  grand-duchies,  Baden,  Hessen-Darmstadt, 
Mecklenburg-Schwerin,  Mecklenburg-Strelitz,  Saxe-Weimar,  Luxemburg 
and  Oldenburg;  9  duchies,  Meiningen,  Koburg-Gotha,  Altenburg,  Dessau, 
Kothen,  Bernburg,  Nassau,  Brunswick  and  Holstein;  10  Furstenthiimer, 
the  landgraviat  of  Hessen-Homburg,  and  the  4  free  cities  of  Frankfort, 
Hamburg,  Bremen  and  Liibeck.  —  Weber,  II,  555,  Fischer,  Nation  u. 
Bundestag  [1880],  Kaltenborn,  Gesch.  d.  d.  Bundesverhaltnisse,  etc., 
Abschn.  ii,  iii.  This  division  was  '  characterised  by  a  disregard  of  popular 
rights,  of  differences  of  race  and  religion  and  of  historical  tradition,  worthy 
of  Napoleon  in  his  most  absolute  days.  Europe  was  treated  as  if  it  were 
a  blank  map  which  might  be  divided  simply  into  arbitrary  districts  of  so 
many  square  miles  and  so  many  inhabitants.'  Blucher  wrote  to  his  old 
friend  Ruchel,  'The  good  Vienna  Congress  resembles  an  annual  fair, 
whither  every  farmer  drives  his  cattle  to  sell  or  to  exchange.'  Gorres  com- 
plained of  '  the  heartless  statistical  system '  of  the  Vienna  diplomatists. 

4  Diet  with  one  representative  from  each  state,  to  sit  at  Frankfort,  an 
Austrian  plenipotentiary  for  president.  Diet  to  settle  all  disputes  between 
states,  each  of  which  was  forbidden  to  make  war  on  any  of  the  rest,  or 
alliances  unfavorable  to  them.  There  was  to  be  a  Bund-army  of  300,000 
men,  and  the  Bund  was  to  make  war  and  treaties.     Cf.  §  16,  n.  6. 

8  In  view  of  her  immense  sacrifices :  140,000  men  since  the  beginning 
of  1813,  Prussia  pressed  for  the  whole  of  the  grand-duchy  of  Warsaw 
[Poland],  all  Saxony  and  all  Lothringen.  These  possessions  would  have 
given  her  a  most  heterogeneous  population,  and  probably  retarded  her 
progress  in  national  character  and  spirit,  so  that  her  foes  in  refusing 
such  extension  really  did  her  a  kindness.  The  settlement  left  the  king- 
dom indeed  not  quite  so  large  as  in  1806:  108,000  sq.  miles  to  122,- 
000,  but  the  exchange  of  Slavic  for  German  population  and  the  westward 
shifting  of  the  centre  of  gravity  more  than  compensated.  In  these  felici- 
tous conditions  Prussia  possessed  a  far  richer  promise  of  the  future  head- 
ship of  Germany  than  did  Austria  in  her  new  Italian  dominion. 


§    10      METTERNICHISMUS 

Muller,  1-90.    Fischer,  Nation  u.  Bundestag;  bk.  viii.    Treitschke,  vols,  ii,  iii.    Weir, 
ch.  vi.    Seeley,  Stein,  pt.  ix.   Alison,  ch.  xxvii.    Flathe,  as  in  bibliog.    Fyffe,  II,  ii. 

The  new  Bund  was  ruled,  no  less  than  it  had  been 
created,  as  Austria's  and    Metternich's  tool,  to  make 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE   NEW    EMPIRE  41/ 

Germany,  Prussia  included,  the  vassal  of  Hapsburg,  and 
to  stay  the  advance  of  liberalism.  The  presence  of  the 
French  in  Germany,  reminding  of  the  Republic,  had 
quickened  and  generalized  the  wish  for  constitutional 
rule,  the  hatred  of  personal.  While  peril  lasted,  the 
powers  heeded.  Czar  Alexander  received  Poland  on 
condition  of  granting  it  a  constitution,  Frederic  William 
promised  Prussia  a  constitution,  article  xiii  of  the  Bund- 
acts  declared  that  each  of  the  confederate  states  was  to 
have  a  constitution  with  representation.  Liberals  fully 
expected  that  ere  long  constitutionalism  would  prevail 
on  the  continent  as  in  England.  Bitter  disappointment 
awaited  this  hope,  the  next  period  being  but  a  record  of 
Metternich's  triumphs,  of  monarchs'  mean  devices  to 
evade  their  pledges  and  hush  the  popular  cry.1  Except 
Saxe-Weimar2  not  a  state  of  the  Bund  obtained  a  truly 
liberal  ground-law.  Bavaria,  Wiirttemberg  and  Baden, 
which  had  felt  France  most,  had  charters  by  1820,  but 
these  modified  absolutism  only  a  little,  and  were  given 
partly  to  spite  the  larger  states,  surrendering  to  reac- 
tion. In  the  North  the  aristocracy,  powerful  and  igno- 
rant, would  yield  naught  of  its  old  privileges,  nor  con- 
sider any  constitution  but  the  antique  one  of  estates, 
which  gave  the  middle  and  lower  classes  no  audible 
voice.  In  Austria  the  path  of  constitutional  movement 
was  blocked  utterly.  And  the  privileges  which  were 
conceded  elsewhere  were  vitally  vitiated  by  appearing 
as  grants,  not  as  rights.  All  seeking  by  the  people  to 
wrest  concessions  was  viewed  as  Jacobinism,  with  Reign 
of  Terror  behind.  Press,  pulpit,  school3  and  platform 
were  under  gag-laws,  patriots  executed,  exiled  or  silenced 


41 8  PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

by  an  infamous  system  of  espionage,  which  Napoleon 
would  have  blushed  to  own.  The  Bund-diet  became 
the  agent  of  tyranny,  its  lethargy  and  weakness  its  sole 
redeeming  features. 

1  Poland  received  her  constitution,  a  liberal  one,  revoked  however  in 
1830,  when  the  czar  put  down  the  Polish  rebellion  and  made  'order  reign 
in  Warsaw.'  The  king  of  Prussia  utterly  belied  his  solemn  pledge,  after 
having  even  gone  so  far  as  to  name  the  limit  of  time  within  which  a  com- 
mission should  meet  to  draft  the  promised  instrument.  Prussia  thus 
squandered  another  inestimable  opportunity  to  assume  the  first  place 
among  the  German  states.  The  Rhenish  Mercury,  which  called  for  the 
fulfilment  of  the  engagement,  was  suppressed.  The  same  offence  cost 
Arndt  and  the  brothers  Welcker  their  Bonn  professorships  with  imprison- 
ment, and  exiled  Gorres  and  Jahn.  In  Saxony,  Mecklenburg,  Hannover, 
Brunswick  and  Oldenburg  aristocratic  government  went  on  after  the  erec- 
tion of  the  Bund  just  as  before. 

3  Nassau  received  in  1814  a  constitution  worthy  the  name,  but  it  was 
not  set  in  exercise  till  1818,  and  was  then  to  a  great  extent  neutralized  by 
the  administration.  Karl-August,  the  grand-duke  of  Saxe- Weimar,  in 
May,  1816,  acting  with  the  estates,  granted  a  genuinely  democratic  ground- 
law,  providing  for  the  representation  of  all  citizens,  the  voting  of  taxes, 
and  the  freedom  of  the  press.  Most  of  these  German  constitutions  were 
modelled  upon  the  French  charter  of  Louis  XVIII. 

8  The  universities  were  indeed  special  centres  of  liberal  enthusiasm, 
the  Jena  '  BurscAenscAaft'  having  spread  to  all  the  other  universities,  but  it 
was  ludicrous  that  the  grand  rally  of  German  students  at  the  Warthurg 
Castle,  Oct.  18,  181 7,  to  celebrate  the  300th  anniversary  of  the  Reforma- 
tion and  the  4th  of  the  battle  of  Leipzig,  should  be  feared  by  Metternich 
and  his  minions  as  shaking  the  pillars  of  state.  The  Jena  Burschenschaft 
with  the  permission  of  the  Weimar  government  had  invited  all  the  student- 
bodies  in  Germany  to  send  delegates  to  the  celebration.  About  500  young 
men  assembled.  The  exercises  were  mainly  religious,  yet  speakers  natu- 
rally alluded  to  German  hopes  deferred.  Writings  of  the  advocates  of 
absolutism  were  burned  and  the  black,  red  and  gold  standard  of  the  old 
empire  saluted  with  fervor.  Several  Prussian  universities  were  suppressed 
in  consequence  of  this  excitement.  The  Russian  envoy,  Stourdza,  who 
had  at  the  Congress  of  Aix-la-Chapelle,  181 8,  presented  a  memorandum 
denouncing    the    revolutionary   tendency    of   the   universities,   two  Jena 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE  419 

students,  counts  Bochholz  and  Keller,  challenged  to  a  duel.  In  1819  a 
theological  student  named  Sand  poniarded  Kotzebue  for  editorials  in  his 
paper  ridiculing  and  condemning  the  students  as  hostile  to  good  govern- 
ment. These  events  led  Metternich  to  convoke  at  Carlsbad,  Aug.  7,  1819, 
the  conference  which  issued  the  famous  Carlsbad  Decrees,  instituting  rigor- 
ous censorship  over  universities  and  the  press  and  against  all '  demagogical 
associations.'  Professors  were  to  be  watched  as  closely  as  students,  and 
to  be  displaced  for  any  teachings  calcula'Ved  to  disturb  '  the  public  order 
and  peace  or  the  bases  of  existing  political  arrangements.' 

§    II       185D 

Droyten,  Abhandlung,  zur  Gesch.  d.  pr.  PoliCk  in  i83<>-'2.  Alison,  ch.  xxiv. 
Klupfel,  as  in  bibliog.  Couchon-Lemaire,  Hist,  de  la  riv.  de  1830.  Fyffe, 
II,  v,  vii. 

The  French  revolution  of  1830  swept  across  all 
Europe,  but  enormous  as  was  the  good  which  it  effected 
in  Belgium,  England  and  indeed  everywhere1  outside  of 
Metternich's  reach,  it  confirmed,  not  alleviated,  the 
political  wretchedness  of  Germany.  Its  immediate  in- 
fluence was  most  marked  along  the  Rhine,  in  the 
smaller  states,  which  were  near  France,2  sympathized 
with  its  rage  against  the  Bourbons  and  contained  most 
of  the  German  progressive  party.  The  fall  of  Warsaw 
and  the  consequent  influx  of  Polish  patriots  quickened 
liberal  zeal.  But  this,  owing  to  the  total  lack  of  politi- 
cal training,  was  abstract  rather  than  practical,  studying 
grievances  more  than  remedies,  and  it  was  as  yet  too 
little  devoted  to  the  deliverance  of  the  nation  as  a  whole. 
Hence  several  wild  outbreaks,3  accomplishing  no  good 
but  greatly  hindering  real  progress.  Hannover,  Bruns- 
wick, Saxony  and  electoral  Hesse  now  secured  constitu- 
tions, which,  in  spite  of  the  diet's  efforts  to  make  them 
so,  were  not  of  the  antique  estates-pattern,  yet  the  Han- 
noverian  was  suppressed  in  1837  by  the  new  king,  Ernest 


420  PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

Augustus,  who  punished  seven  of  Gottingen's  ablest 
professors 4  for  protesting.  German  liberalism  had  for 
a  time  a  stout  champion  in  King  William  of  Wiirttem- 
berg,  who  sought  to  unite  the  central  and  southern 
lands  into  a  political  and  military  alliance  which  could 
halt  or  hinder  the  absolutist  march.  But  Metternich, 
backed  by  Prussia,  adroitly  put  forward  in  this  base 
work  to  destroy  her  prestige,  using  spies,  prisons  and 
corrupt  courts  and  promoting  the  '  loyal,'  succeeded  in 
stamping  out  liberty  and  progress  as  effectually  in  Ger- 
many as  in  Austria,  Italy  and  Spain.6  The  final  acts  of 
the  Vienna  Congress  in  1820,  together  with  the  diet's 
decrees  of  1832,  assuming  right  to  annul  a  Landtag's6 
laws,  immensely  strengthened  the  Bund  for  evil.  Small 
states  could  now  be  forced  to  persecute  each  other. 
Constitutions  and  personal  rights  were  nullified,  all 
political  powers  boldly  declared  to  reside  in  the  Fiirsten. 
Karl-August  and  King  William  were  driven  to  change 
course,  all  patriots  to  recant,  wait  in  silence,  or  busy 
themselves  in  literature,  which  tyranny  fostered  as  a 
narcotic.  Compared  with  this  leaden  despotism  Napo- 
leon or  the  worst  Bourbons  furnished  an  ideal  rule. 

1  Belgium  was  now  separated  from  Holland,  with  which  the  Vienna 
Congress  had  so  stupidly  joined  it.  England  passed  its  first  great  Reform 
Bill  in  1832.  Poland  now  lost  the  constitution  of  1815  and  became  a 
mere  Russian  province,  though  with  special  administration. 

2  The  Prussian  Rhine-provinces  had  been  left  to  a  great  extent  in  the 
enjoyment  of  the  French  laws  and  administrative  methods  established 
while  they  belonged  to  France.  The  Rhein-Bund  had  left  memories  of 
order,  personal  rights  and  freedom  which  men  could  not  help  associating 
with  France. 

3  At  the  '  Hambach  Festival,'  in  Rhenish  Bavaria,  windy  orators  ha- 
rangued some  30,000  men  and  women  decked  in  black,  red  and  gold,  cry- 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE  42 1 

mg  '  to  arms,  down  with  the  princes,'  etc.  A  band  of  misguided  conspira- 
tors overpowered  the  Frankfort  police  and  military  for  a  few  hours,  April 
3,  1833.     Miiller,  159  sq.,  Weber,  780. 

4  'The  Gottingen  Seven' :  Albrecht,  Dahlmann,  Ewald,  Gervinus,  Weber 
and  the  two  Grimms.  All  were  deprived  of  their  posts,  and  Dahlmann, 
Gervinus  and  Jacob  Grimm,  who  had  published  their  protests,  had  to  leave 
the  country  within  three  days.  The  diet  supported  Ernest  Augustus  in 
this.  He  had  in  England  been  the  Tory  leader.  But  for  prevalence  of 
the  Salic  law  [Ch.  VI,  §  1 1,  n.  1]  in  Hannover,  Victoria  would  at  this  time, 
1837,  have  become  monarch  of  Hannover  as  of  England. 

6  The  Holy  Alliance  [Ch.  X,  §  20,  n.  7]  was  shamefully  instrumental  in 
oppressing  these  lands.  Its  plausible  principle  of  mutual  cooperation  on 
the  part  of  the  banded  monarchs  was  stretched  to  apply  to  all  cases  where 
monarchy  was  threatened  by  revolution.  Under  its  auspices  Austria  beat 
down  liberalism  through  the  entire  length  of  Italy  in  1821,  and  France 
aided  Ferdinand  VII  of  Spain  in  1823  to  overthrow  the  Cadiz  constitution. 
Fear  that  it  purposed  to  aid  Spain  in  recovering  her  lost  American  de- 
pendencies evoked  the  Monroe  Doctrine  from  President  Monroe  in  his 
message,  Dec,  1823. 

6  Landtag •=  the  diet  or  legislature  of  one  of  the  states  composing  the 
confederation. 


§  12    The  Mirage  of  '48 

Weber,  II,  799  sqq.  Miiller,  186-292.  Van  Deventer,  50  annees  de  Vhist.  federate 
de  I'Allemagne.  Baring-Gould,  Germany  Past  and  Present,  2  v.  Klupfel,  ~s  in 
bibliog.     Kaltenborn,  Gesch.  d.  d.  Bundesverhaltnisse ,  etc.,  Abschn.  v. 

Liberal  ideas,  domestic  and  streaming  in  with  easier 
communication  from  Italy,  Greece,  England,  France 
and  especially  Switzerland,1  proved  at  last  more  than  a 
match  for  Metternich,  and  when  the  revolution  of  1848 
rocked  to  its  base  every  throne  of  Continental  Europe, 
he  fell.  Longing  for  German  unity  and  freedom  now 
revived,  more  intense  and  hopeful  than  ever.  Radicals 
urged  a  German  republic,  to  match  the  new  French  one, 
but  most  patriots  —  a  dream  cherished  ever  since  the 
collapse  thereof  —  favored  resuscitation  of  the  old  em- 


422  PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

pire,2  with  a  strong  and  responsible  executive,  and  a 
central,  popularly  elective  parliament.  Conservatives 
themselves  demanded  that  the  diet,  representing  Furs- 
ten  alone,  should  be  supplemented  by  a  popular  chamber. 
There  were  liberal  risings  in  every  state,3  liberal  minis- 
tries came  in,  both  Prussia  and  Austria  secured  genu- 
ine constitutions.4  A  meeting  at  Heidelberg,  March  5, 
chose  a  committee  of  seven  to  summon  a  preliminary 
convention  and  publish  a  plan  for  a  regular  Constituent 
Assembly,  and  such  an  Assembly  convened  at  Frankfort 
on  May  18.  Thus  challenged,  the  diet  too  set  to  work 
to  amend  the  ground-law  of  the  Bund  itself,  but  the 
Constituent  having  elected  Archduke  John  imperial 
administrator  pending  choice  of  an  emperor,  the  old 
legislature  resigned  to  him  its  power  and  dispersed. 
Abstractly  considered,  the  new  constitution  was  well 
enough,6  but,  although  traversing  all  the  principles  and 
practice  of  Prussia  and  Austria  and  sure  to  meet  their 
hostility,  it  lacked  power  to  coerce  or  to  set  itself  in 
motion.  Its  impotence  was  soon  apparent.  The  war 
with  Denmark  over  Schleswig-Holstein,  waged  by  the 
Assembly  and  Prussia  in  common,  the  latter  terminated 
in  defiance  of  the  Assembly,  which  had  to  yield.  On 
the  question  whether  the  empire  should  embrace  Austria 
the  klein-dentsche  party  was  victor,  but  Austria  boldly 
refused  to  be  excluded.  The  king  of  Prussia  having 
been  elected  emperor,  the  emperor  of  Austria  and  sev- 
eral other  princes  declared  that  they  would  not  obey 
him.  Frederic  William  of  course  declined  the  dignity, 
which  then  went  begging.  The  plan  for  a  new  polity 
had  failed  utterly.    The  Assembly's  best  members  gone, 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE  423 

the  Rump  adjourned  to  Stuttgart,  to  be  soon  dispersed 
by  the  military.  Prussian  troops  quelled  South  German 
disorder,  and  on  September  2,  1850,  the  old  diet  resumed 
its  idle  deliberations. 

1  We  cannot  even  sketch  the  process  of  this  revolution  in  these  lands, 
but  must  refer  to  the  literature  named  at  the  head  of  the  paragraph.  Miil- 
ler's  chapters  give  the  best  resume. 

2  Although  the  proclamation  of  Kalisch  by  czar  Alexander  and  king 
Frederic  Wm.,  Mch.  25,  181 3,  had  named  as  one  of  the  objects  of  the  then 
imminent  war  to  afford  the  German  peoples  defense  '  in  reestablishing  a 
venerable  empire,'  the  ruling  powers  had  since  1815  somehow  viewed  with 
horror  all  thoughts  of  restoring  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  in  any  form,  per- 
haps because  agitators  had  usually  cried  for  it.  The  popular  feeling  beau- 
tifully appears  in  Schenkendorf's  Wollt  ihr  Keinen  Kaiser  Kuren  ? 

1   Frei geworden  ist  der  Strom, 

1st  das  Land  ant  deutschen  Rheine; 

Dock  der  Stuhl  von  Felsgesteine 

Trauert  nock  im  Aachener  Dont. 
1   Stent  er  wohl  nock  lange  leer  f 

Will  sick  drauf  kein  Kaiser  setzen 

Allen  Volkem  zum  Ergotzen, 

Der  Bedr'dngten  Schirm  und  Wehr  t 
3   Ack,  die  Sehnsucht  wird  so  laid  ! 

Wollt  ihr  keinen  Kaiser  kuren  f 

Kommt  kein  Ritter  heimzufuhren 

Deutsckland  die  verlassne  Braut  ? 

8  Both  Berlin  and  Vienna  were  for  a  time  in  the  hands  of  the  populace. 
In  the  liberalist  stir  of  these  days  in  Baden  Franz  Sigel,  general  in  the 
American  Civil  War,  first  became  prominent,  and  the  name  of  Carl  Schurz 
was  heard.  Hosts  of  the  German  patriots  went  to  America  so  soon  as 
hope  of  a  new  government  proved  vain. 

4  For  Prussia's  constitution  of  1847,  see  §  15,  n.  1.  The  new,  liberal 
one  was  sworn  to  by  the  king  on  Feb.  6,  1850. 

8  There  was  to  be  a  Reichstag  or  diet,  made  up  of  senate  and  popular 
assembly,  the  senate  consisting  of  delegates  half  of  whom  were  to  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  state  governments  and  half  by  the  state  legislatures.  It 
was  a  loose  confederation  after  all,  yet  as  close  as  Germany  was  prepared 
for.  Had  it  prevailed,  Germany  would  have  appeared  as  a  unity  at  least 
in  its  foreign  relations  and  in  war. 


424  PRUSSIA    AND   THE   NEW    EMPIRE 


§  13     Sequel 

Bryci,  419  sq.    M'.iller,  as  at  §  12.    Frank,  Wiederherstellung  Deutschlands. 

1  The  effects,  however,  of  the  great  uprising  of  1 848 
were  not  lost  in  Germany  any  more  than  in  Italy  and 
Hungary.  It  had  made  things  seem  possible,  seem  even 
for  a  moment  accomplished,  which  had  been  till  then 
mere  visions  ;  it  had  awakened  a  keen  political  interest 
in  the  people,  stirred  their  whole  life,  and  given  them  a 
sense  of  national  unity 1  such  as  they  had  not  had  since 
1814.  By  showing  the  governments  how  insecure  were 
the  foundations  of  their  arbitrary  power,  it  had  made 
them  less  unwilling  to  accept  change ;  it  had  taught 
peoples  how  little  was  to  be  expected  from  the  unforced 
goodwill  of  princes.  From  this  time,  therefore,  after  the 
first  reaction  had  spent,  itself,  one  may  observe  a  real 
though  slow  progress  towards  free  constitutional  life. 
In  some  of  the  smaller  states,  and  particularly  in  Baden, 
it  soon  came  to  be  the  policy  of  the  government  to 
encourage  the  action  of  the  local  parliament ;  and  the 
Prussian  assembly  became  in  its  long  and  spirited  strug- 
gle with  the  crown  a  political  school  of  incomparable 
value  to  the  rest  of  Germany  as  well  as  to  its  own  great 
kingdom.  One  thing  more,  the  events  of  1848-50  made 
clear  to  the  nation  the  hopelessness  of  expecting  any- 
thing from  the  Confederation.' 

1  Hence  the  rise  of  the  National-  Verein  in  1859,  nucleus  of  the  national- 
liberal  party,  which  ramified  through  all  the  German  states,  holding 
meetings  from  time  to  time  and  issuing  pamphlets  and  manifestoes.  It  de- 
scended lineally  from  the  klein-deittsche  party  of  the  Frankfort  parliament. 
From  '62  it  had  a  rival  in  the  Reform  Union,  which  was  gross-deutsch 


PRUSSIA    AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE  425 

in  sentiment,  pretending  to  wish  reform  for  Germany,  yet  determined  that 
Austria  should  not  be  excluded.  This  Union  had  few  supporters  in  Prus- 
sia, many  in  Hannover  and  the  south.  The  contest  between  these 
unions  kept  the  wretchedness  of  the  existing  constitution  constantly  before 
the  public  mind,  accustoming  all  to  the  assurance  that  reform  or  revolu- 
tion must  come  at  last. 


§  14    Prussia's  Last  Genuflection 

Mulltr,  Periods  III  and  IV.   Treitschke,  Zehtt  Jahre  d.  Kampfe.  Klutfel,  as  in  bibliog. 

For  declining  the  imperial  crown  as  proffered  Frederic 
William  IV  had  two  reasons,  viz.,  that  the  revolution 
was  spent l  and  that  Prussia  had  a  plan  of  her  own  for 
reforming  the  empire.  The  thought  thrust  forward  by 
Frederic  the  Great  in  his  North  German  Fiirsten-Bund% 
had  never  become  Prussia's  conscious  policy  but  had  not 
been  forgotten.  The  Peace  of  Basel,  1795,3  stipulated 
that  all  the  German  states  north  of  a  certain  parallel 
should  share  its  benefits  like  Prussia.  In  1806  Frederic 
William  III  sought  to  found  a  North  German  league4 
to  oppose  Napoleon's  Rhein-Bund.  Far  more  signifi- 
cant in  the  same  direction  was  the  Zollverein?  of  1833, 
uniting  all  Germany  proper  under  Prussia's  leadership, 
with  striking  and  tangible  advantage.  We  have  seen 
too  the  klein-deutsche  party  once  at  least  in  majority  in 
the  Frankfort  Assembly.6  In  refusing  the  crown  offered 
him  by  the  people's  representatives  Frederic  William 
remembered  this  history,  and  he  immediately  advanced 
the  Prussian  proposition  for  uniting  Germany,  on  a  more 
conservative  and  monarchical  basis,  excluding  Austria 
altogether  and  explicitly  recognizing  Prussia's  hegemony. 
The  imperial  party  of  the  Frankfort  Assembly  strongly 
approved.    On  May  26,  1849,  was  concluded  the  League 


426  PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

of  the  three  Kings,  Hannover  and  Saxony  with  Prussia, 
to  which  most  of  the  smaller  states  at  once  adhered. 
Partly  launched  next  year  in  the  Erfurt  Parliament  and 
the  Berlin  Congress  of  Fiirsten,  the  scheme  was  wrecked 
by  the  opposition  of  Austria,  now  again  in  high  ascend- 
ant from  its  triumphs  in  Italy  and  Hungary  and  straining 
every  nerve  to  snatch  from  Prussia  the  first  place  in 
German  affairs.  It  was  wholly  successful.  South  Ger- 
many drew  off  from  Prussia  to  the  Austrian  side,  and 
against  Prussia's  protest  the  diet  was  reopened.  War 
was  imminent  when  on  the  rise  of  anarchy  in  Hesse 7 
Prussia  intervened  for  people,  the  diet  with  Austrian 
and  Bavarian  troops  for  prince.  In  this  crucial  juncture 
Prussia,  as  so  often  before,  played  the  coward  and  dashed 
all  patriotic  hopes.  Manteuffel  succeeded  Radowitz  as 
minister,  and  in  conferences  at  Olmiitz  and  Dresden, 
i850-'5 1,  kissed  Austria's  feet  on  Prussia's  behalf.  The 
Bund  was  fully  restored.  Thoughts  of  a  federal  consti- 
tution and  popular  rights  were  ignored,  and  an  absolutist 
reaction  set  in  much  as  after  1830. 

1  Probably  the  Prussian  government  would  at  no  time  thus  early  have 
been  willing  to  accede  to  so  liberal  a  constitution  as  was  made  at  Frank- 
fort, yet  under  the  pressure  of  the  revolutionary  storm  when  at  its  height 
concessions  might  have  been  obtained  far  easier  than  at  the  late  hour  that 
saw  the  constitution  completed.  Prussia  was,  however,  in  course  of  politi- 
cal progress  [§§  15-17]. 

2  Formed  against  Austria  in  1785,  by  Prussia,  Saxony  and  Hannover 
[the  same  powers  that  unite  now  again  in  1849],  soon  joined  by  Bruns- 
wick, Mainz,  Hessen-Kassel,  Baden,  Mecklenburg,  Anhalt  and  the  Thu- 
ringian  principalities  [Seeley's  Stein,  pt.  i,  ch.  ii,  Ranke,  D.  deutschen 
Mdchte  u.  d.  Furstenbund,  2  v.].  It  amounted  to  little  [Frederic  dying 
next  year]  save  as  a  hint  for  the  future.  We  have  seen  that  there  had 
been  ever  since  the  Reformation  a  tendency  to  cleavage  between  no.  Ger- 
many and  south,  one  form  which  it  took  being  that  of  the  corpus  evan- 
gelicorutn  meditated  by  Gustavus  Adolphus. 


PRUSSIA   AND    THE   NEW   EMPIRE  427 

»  Ch.  X,  §  17. 

4  Such  a  scheme  had  been  suggested  to  him  by  Napoleon  himself. 
Prussia  was  to  be  head  of  the  league,  Saxony  and  Hesse  next,  Hanseatic 
towns  to  have  special  privileges,  Hildesheim  to  be  the  federal  city.  See- 
ley's  Stein,  vol.  i,  245. 

5  Or  Customs-Union.  The  Vienna  Congress  had  left  each  of  the  38 
states  of  the  Bund  to  erect  its  own  customs-system.  Wiirttemberg  and 
Bavaria  formed  a  customs-union  in  1828,  Prussia  and  Hessen-Darmstadt  a 
month  later.  The  great  naturalist,  Oken,  conceived  the  plan  of  uniting 
the  two  unions.  The  Association  of  German  Naturalists  debated  the  pro- 
ject at  the  annual  meeting  in  Berlin,  1828,  and  it  was  realized  in  1833. 
1  Imperceptibly  the  states  of  the  Zollverein,  with  a  population  of  about  27 
million,  came  into  a  certain  dependence  upon  Prussia,  which,  although  at 
first  only  affecting  industrial  and  commercial  interests,  might  readily  be 
improved  for  national  and  political  ends.' —  Miiller,  165.  Austria  repeatedly 
sought  admittance  but  was  refused.     See  Weber,  784. 

6  See  §  12,  also  §  13,  n.,  in  relation  to  the  question  whether  to  include 
Austria  in  the  new  government. 

7  The  elector  had  dismissed  a  liberal  cabinet,  dissolved  two  parliaments 
for  not  confirming  his  illegal  measures,  and  resolved  to  rule  alone.  He 
made  Hassenpflug,  the  most  detested  man  in  the  land,  his  minister.  Op- 
posed by  the  courts  he  placed  the  country  under  martial  law.  Police, 
army  and  civil  officers  refused  obedience,  and  the  elector  fled  to  Frank- 
fort, where  he  of  course  secured  the  diet's  aid,  as  it  would  not  do  to  allow 
a  ruler,  however  wicked,  to  be  overborne  by  the  popular  will,  however 
legally  and  peaceably  brought  to  bear.  This  was  characteristic  of  the 
reaction  now  in  progress.  Poor,  patient  Germany  had  once  more  to  take 
up  its  old,  heavy  yoke. 


§  15     A  Spinal  Column 

Busch,  and  Poschinger,  as  in  bibliog. 

At  last  after  so  many  humiliations,  disappointments, 
sacrificed  opportunities,  Prussia  found  a  man,  a  veritable 
Fredericus  redevivus,  whom  Austria  could  not  frighten 
or  bend.  Trained  in  the  united  diet x  of  Prussia  from 
1847  to  '50,  member  of  the  Erfurt  Parliament  in  '50  and 


428  PRUSSIA    AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

of  the  Bund-diet  from  '51  to  '59,  minister  to  St.  Peters- 
burg in  '59,  to  Paris  in  '62,  and  then  minister-president 
and  foreign  secretary  at  home,  by  the  time  of  the  events 
just  narrated  Bismarck  was  master  of  Prussian,  German, 
and  European  politics.  First  an  enthusiast  for  Austria, 
he  learned  at  Frankfort  the  wiles,  corruption  and  hatred 
for  Prussia  of  that  power,  and  vowed  to  live  for  naught 
else  till  he  had  destroyed  its  arbitership  of  Germany's 
destiny.  Not  a  republican  nor  yet  a  constitutional2 
monarchist  of  full  liberal  stripe,  Bismarck  saw  the  ne- 
cessity of  winning  to  the  side  of  his  government  the 
popular  conscience  and  intelligence,  and  he  hated  Met- 
ternich's  methods  no  less  heartily  than  did  Gagern 3 
himself.  Zealot  for  German  unity,  he  had  no  faith  in 
seeking  this  by  the  Frankfort  plan,  which  could  succeed 
only  in  proportion  as  it  denationalized  constituent  states, 
or  any  otherwise  than  by  the  '  blood  and  iron ' 4  of  some 
single  power,  with  which  the  rest  had  in  the  main  com- 
mon interests.  He  viewed  Prussia  as  such  a  power, 
with  him  Prussian  and  German  patriotism  being  identi- 
cal. He  was  fortunate  in  the  new  king,  William,5  politi. 
cally  timid  like  most  Hohenzollern,  but  a  brave  soldier, 
with  a  keen  mind  for  military  organization,  and  trustful 
of  his  minister.  Opposed  in  the  lower  house  of  the  Prus- 
sian diet  and  never  liberal  enough  for  the  progressists, 
the  resolute  premier  managed  to  carry  with  him  the 
living  forces  of  Prussia,  and  more  and  more  to  gain  the 
confidence  of  Germany.  That  Prussia  would  no  longer 
follow  Austria  he  announced  loudly,  and  the  fact  that 
by  intriguing  with  the  little  states  Austria  fully  con- 
trolled the  diet,6  gave  him  plausible  ground  for  soon 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW   EMPIRE  429 

repudiating  the  Bund  itself  and  renewing  Frederic  Wil- 
liam IV's  motion  of  1849."  Meantime  events  enabled 
him  to  use  other  than  diplomatic  methods  in  realizing 
such  an  idea. 

1  Still  a  diet  of  estates,  with  no  properly  popular  representation,  and 
differing  from  the  preceding  legislative  apparatus  of  Prussia  almost  solely 
in  consisting  of  a  single  assembly,  acting  for  all  the  provinces  under  the 
Prussian  crown.  There  were  two  curia  :  the  house  of  lords,  made  up  of 
princes  of  the  blood,  foreign  princes  holding  fiefs  from  Prussia,  '  media- 
tized nobles,'  i.e.,  such  as  had  had  lands  and  lost  them  by  the  acts  of 
Napoleon  or  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  and  the  representatives  of  certain 
foundations  and  corporations;  and  the  house  of  the  three  estates,  wherein 
sat  representatives  of  the  Ritterschaft  or  lesser  nobility  and  gentry,  of  the 
cities,  and  of  the  country  parishes.  This  mock  legislature  had  no  initia- 
tive, and  on  general  legislation  could  merely  advise,  but  it  could  veto  any 
law  to  increase  taxes.  Patriots  frowned  upon  so  mean  a  creation,  yet 
hoped  that  it  might,  as  it  did,  lead  to  something  better.  On  Feb.  6,  1850, 
Fred.  Wm.  IV  swore  to  a  new  constitution  which  his  Landtag  had  pre- 
pared, truly  liberal  in  nature. 

2  A  chief  reason  for  the  long  delay  of  tolerable  government  in  Ger- 
many was  the  conflict  of  the  sentiment  for  unity  with  that  for  constitution- 
alism. The  Prussian  policy  was  strongly  anti-republican,  repelling  liberals 
like  Rotteck,  Welcker  and  Gagern,  whose  main  home  was  in  the  Centre 
and  South,  even  when  they  were  convinced  that  Prussian  victory  meant  a 
united  Fatherland.  Union  finally  came  by  compromise,  Prussia  becoming 
more  liberal,  the  ultra-liberals  insisting  less  on  ideally  free  institutions  at 
once.  King  William  and  Bismarck  were  so  late  as  '63  both  apparently 
reactionary,  utter  foes  of  constitutionalism,  so  that  liberals  were  'disposed 
fairly  to  abjure  Prussia  as  given  over  to  a  reprobate  mind.' 

8  President  of  the  Frankfort  Constituent  Assembly.  He  was  among 
the  ablest  German  constitutional  monarchists  of  the  time. 

*  'It  is  not  by  speeches  and  resolutions  of  majorities  that  the  great 
questions  of  the  time  are  to  be  decided  —  that  was  the  mistake  of  i848-'9 
—  but  by  blood  and  iron.'1  —  Bismarck. 

5  William  I,  king  of  Prussia  since  Jan.  2,  1861,  emperor  since  '71.  He 
commanded  the  troops  which  had  to  subdue  in  Baden  and  Rhenish  Bavaria 
the  last  disorders  of  the  revolution  of  i848-'o.  [§  12]. 

6  There  was  no  fairness  in  the  composition  of  the  Bund-diet.     Austria, 


430  PRUSSIA    AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

Prussia,  Bavaria,  Saxony,  Hannover,  Wiirtlemberg  and  Baden  together 
had  in  the  Council  or  abridged  diet  only  7  votes  to  the  10  controlled  by 
the  smaller  states.  In  the  plenum  those  great  states  had  but  27,  the  rest 
39.  By  underhanded  higgling,  wherein  her  ministers  were  adepts,  Austria 
could  always  secure  a  majority  against  Prussia,  if  wishing  to  do  so.  When 
the  Bund  began  operations  again  after  the  '48-'o.  revolution  it  had  no 
more  loyal  member  than  Prussia.  Schwarzenberg's  avowed  policy,  avilir 
la  Prusse  et  apres  la  demolir,  had  not  then  been  openly  avowed,  so  that 
Manteuffel  could  announce  Prussia's  as  still  Verbriiderung  und  Biindniss 
mil  Oesterreich.  Rochow  on  entering  the  reopened  diet  made  a  set  speech, 
inspired  from  Berlin,  in  which  he  energetically  supported  the  revival  of 
the  Bund  as  a  hopeful  advance  in  German  public  law.  Even  Bismarck 
went  thither  in  this  mind,  fully  trusting  in  Austria.  In  less  than  a  year 
he  was  undeceived,  seeing  Austria's  surreptitious  influence  daily  used 
against  Prussia.  Poschinger,  pt.  i,  Einleitung,  and  Urkunde  38.  Austria 
had  no  dream  that  Prussia  would  go  the  bold  way  in  which  Bismarck  soon 
led.  Busch,  vol.  i,  ch.  v. 
7  See  §  13. 

§  16    Crash  of  the  Old  Bund 

Bryee,  423  sqq.  Muller,  Fourth  Period.  Busch,  as  in  bibliog.  Malet,  Overthrow  of 
the  Germanic  Confederation  in  1866.  Treitschke,  Zehn  Jahre  d.  Kdmpfe.  Hozier, 
Seven  Weeks'  War,  2  v.     Cherbulicz,  Allemagne  politique,  /S66-V0. 

In  1863,  defying  an  overwhelming  public  sentiment 
in  Germany,  King  Christian  IX  of  Denmark  proceeded 
to  incorporate  Schleswig 1  with  his  realm,  and  to  treat 
Holstein,  a  member  of  the  Bund,  as  Denmark's  vassal. 
Troops  of  the  Bund  first,  then  those  of  Austria  and 
Prussia  invaded  the  duchies  to  redress  the  injustice, 
and  the  ensuing  war  of  1864  left  these  the  joint  prop- 
erty2 of  the  two  great  German  powers.  Austria  and 
the  Bund,  determined  not  to  enlarge  Prussia,  were  for 
constituting  the  acquired  territory  a  sovereign  member 
of  the  Bund,  under  Duke  Frederic  of  Augustenburg. 
To  this  plan  Prussia  would  consent  only  on  the  impossi- 
ble condition  of  herself  controlling  the  new  state's  military 


PRUSSIA   AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE  43 1 

and  naval  forces  and  postal  system.  As  the  imbroglio 
waxed  grave  Bismarck  boldly  concluded  to  make  the 
Schleswig-Holstein  affair  part  of  the  great  German 
question  of  the  age  and  to  settle  both  at  once.  Care- 
ful diplomacy  assured  him  of  France's  neutrality  and 
of  Sardinia's  cooperation.  Prussia's  invasion  of  Hol- 
stein,  which  by  agreement 3  Austria  was  to  administer, 
the  diet,  pushed  by  Austria,  declares  a  breach  of  the 
peace  and  mobilizes  its  army,  whereupon  Prussia  retires 
forever  from  the  old  Bund,  June  14,  1866.  Next  day 
she  bids  Hannover,  Saxony  and  Electoral  Hesse  place 
their  troops  again  upon  a  peace  footing  and  join  a 
new  confederacy  under  Prussian  headship.  Their  re- 
fusal proved  her  nearest  neighbors  as  unaware 4  as  the 
rest  of  the  world  how  terrible  a  new  will-power  had 
taken  possession  of  Prussia.  One  battle  brought  these 
three  states  to  Prussia's  feet,  a  few  more  skirmishes 
carried  her  arms  across  the  Main,  to  Wurzburg  and 
Niirnberg.  Austria  fared  as  ill  as  her  petty  allies,  be- 
ing so  crippled  in  the  great  battle  of  Koniggratz,5  July 
3,  as  at  once  to  begin  negotiations  for  peace.  In  the 
Treaty  of  Prag,  August  23,  Austria  recognizes  the 
dissolution  of  the  old  Bund,  consents  to  be  excluded 
from  a  new  if  made,  and  cedes  its  rights  in  the  Elbe 
duchies  to  Prussia,  which  now  appropriates  also  Han- 
nover, Electoral  Hesse,  Nassau  and  Frankfort,  thus 
removing  the  wall  between  its  two  halves.  Sardinia 
obtains  Venetia,  Hungary  its  old  constitution.6 

1  The  Schleswig-Holstein  difficulty  was  old  already.  These  lands  ob- 
served the  Salic  law  [Ch.  VI,  §  II,  n.  i]  though  for  centuries  governed  in 
a  personal  union  with  Denmark,  which  did  not.  In  1846  king  Christian 
VIII  of  Denmark,  last  male  of  his  line  except  a  son  and  a  brother  both 


432  PRUSSIA   AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

childless,  proclaimed  that  the  union  was  to  be  permanent,  Salic  law  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding.  This  was  an  affront  not  to  the  duchies  alone 
but  to  all  Germany,  Holstein  being  a  member  of  the  Bund,  as  formerly 
always  of  the  empire.  Hence  when  in  1848  king  Frederic  VII  declared 
Schleswig  incorporated  with  Denmark,  Prussia  and  the  Frankfort  Con- 
stituent Assembly  [instead  of  the  then  suspended  diet]  forcibly  interposed 
and  freed  the  duchies;  but  under  Metternich's  influence  their  protest  soon 
came  to  be  viewed  as  revolutionary,  and  Denmark,  promising  to  respect 
their  rights,  i.e.,  not  to  incorporate,  was  confirmed  in  their  possession  by 
Prussia  and  Austria,  and  even  by  a  protocol  of  all  the  great  powers 
united,  at  London,  May,  1852.  But  in  1863  king  Christian  IX  accepted 
a  new  constitution  which  incorporated  Schleswig  with  Denmark,  as  had 
been  attempted  in  1848.  Prussia  and  Austria  now  interposed  to  carry  out 
the  London  protocol,  but  the  armed  opposition  of  Denmark  gave  them  an 
excuse  for  renouncing  the  protocol,  so  as  to  proceed  independently,  still 
easier  in  that  neither  the  Bund  nor  the  duchies  had  ever  acknowledged 
that  instrument.  Denmark  was  very  bold,  vainly  expecting  the  interposi- 
tion of  Great  Britain  and  France.     Dicey,  Schleswig-Holstein  War. 

2  By  right  of  conquest  as  well  as  succeeding  according  to  the  peace 
of  Vienna,  Oct.  30,  1864,  to  all  the  rights  which  the  king  of  Denmark  had 
over  the  duchies,  whether  by  the  London  protocol  or  otherwise.  The  dif- 
ficulty was  peculiarly  aggravated  by  the  claim  of  duke  Frederic  of  Augus- 
tenburg  to  be  now  ruler  of  the  duchies  by  hereditary  right  under  the  Salic 
law.  Prussia  as  well  as  Austria  recognized  this  claim  on  first  interposing, 
but  subsequently  when  planning  incorporation,  slighted  it  on  the  ground 
that  it  had  been  renounced  by  Frederic's  father.  Prussia's  final  arrange- 
ment with  the  duke  involved  the  marriage  of  his  daughter  with  the  young 
crown-prince  William,  so  that  the  heirs  of  Augustenburg  will  be  kings  of 
Prussia  and  emperors  of  Germany. 

3  The  agreement  of  Gastein,  Aug.  14,  1865.  On  Prussia's  artful  and 
none  too  honorable  diplomacy  at  this  time,  Bryce,  424  sqq.  The  two 
powers  were  to  remain  jointly  sovereign  in  both  Schleswig  and  Holstein, 
but  Prussia  was  to  administer  S.,  Austria  H.  When,  June  2,  the  Austrian 
governor,  v.  Gablenz,  convoked  the  Holstein  estates  against  Prussia's  wish, 
the  latter  declared  it  a  breach  of  the  Gastein  convention,  and  ordered 
Manteuffel,  governor  of  Schleswig,  to  occupy  Holstein  with  troops.  This 
meant  war.  Von  Gablenz  gave  way  under  protest,  and  marched  home- 
ward. 

4  Perhaps  the  world  was  never  before  so  surprised  as  by  the  deeds  of 
Prussia  in  this  war.    The  south  German  states  held  to  Austria  of  course. 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE  433 

Austria  felt  so  sure  of  victory  as  to  decline  the  proffered  mediation  of 
France,  England  and  Russia,  except  on  the  condition  that  no  territorial 
changes  should  be  discussed.  Louis  Napoleon  hailed  the  war  with  pleas- 
ure, assured  of  Prussia's  defeat.  Hence  he  readily  consented  to  the 
Italian- Prussian  alliance.  When,  however,  he  saw  the  Prussian  armies 
sweeping  toward  Vienna  as  if  upon  parade,  he  regretted  the  blows  he  had 
given  Austria  in  1859  [Magenta,  Solferino]  and  sought  to  coax  Victor 
Emanuel  to  put  up  with  Austria's  offer  of  Venetia  and  make  peace  apart 
from  Prussia.     The  king  of  Italy  remained  true  to  Prussia.     Cf.  §  19,  n.  1. 

8  Or  Sadowa. 

6  Taken  from  it  when  the  revolution  of  i848-'9  was  put  down.  The 
war  of  1866  proved  a  great  blessing  to  the  Austrian  lands,  enforcing  all 
manner  of  reforms  in  a  liberal  direction. 

§   17     Birth  of  a  New 

Busch,  vol.  i,  ch.  v.     Laveleyc,  Prusse  et  V Autriche  depuis  Sadowa.     Viron,  Alle- 
magne  depuis  Sadowa. 

That  union  of  Germany  proper  which  Frederic  the 
Great  sought  in  vain  to  effect  in  1785,  Frederic  William 
III  in  1806,  and  Frederic  William  IV  in  1850,  the  triumph 
of  William  I  in  1866  permitted  him  to  achieve.1  Hap- 
pily, as  Prussia's  power  enabled  her  to  enforce 2  union, 
her  own  enlarging  liberalism,  coupled  with  her  hostility 
to  Austria,  its  system  and  its  gross-dentsch  friends,  forced 
her  to  make  that  union  liberal,  as  demanded  by  the 
growing  klein-deutsche  party.  The  result  was  almost 
exactly  what  the  moderates  of  '48  had  sought,  the  new 
constitution  embodying  all  the  feasible  good  of  theirs, 
with  greater  centralization  and  strength.  Presidency 
in  the  Bund  was  made  forever  a  property  of  the  Prus- 
sian monarch,  who  was  also  to  represent  it  internation- 
ally. The  Prussian  military  system,  including  obligation 
of  all  males  to  military  service,  was  made  general,  and 
the  entire  war  and  naval  force  of  the  Bund  consolidated 


434  PRUSSIA   AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

and  placed  under  the  President's  command.  The  vari- 
ous postal  and  telegraph  systems  were  likewise  to  be 
unified,  and  the  Bund  as  such  to  be  alone  represented 
in  the  Zollverein.  The  legislature  was  bicameral,  a 
Bundesrath  or  senate  representing  the  rulers,  and  a 
diet  in  numbers  according  to  population,  elected  by 
direct,  universal  suffrage,  to  be  convoked  at  least  annu- 
ally. The  Rath  voted  scrutin  de  liste,  the  diet  viritim. 
Consent  of  the  former  was  necessary  to  a  declaration  of 
war,  of  both  to  the  validity  of  an  imperial  law.  The 
chancellor  or  imperial  minister  was  made  responsible. 

1  On  August  1 8,  1 866,  Prussia  concluded  with  Saxe- Weimar,  Olden- 
burg, Brunswick,  Saxe-Altenburg,  Saxe-Coburg-Gotha,  Anhalt,  Schwarz- 
burg-Sondershausen,  Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt,Waldeck,  Reuss  younger  line, 
Schaumburg-Lippe,  Liibeck,  Bremen  and  Hamburg,  a  treaty  of  alliance,  to 
which  Mecklenburg-Schwerin  and  -Strelitz  acceded  on  the  2ist,  and  a  little 
later,  Saxony,  Saxe-Meiningen,  Reuss  older  line,  and  Hesse  for  its  parts 
north  of  the  Main,  providing  for  the  calling  of  a  convention-parliament  to 
prepare  a  constitution.  The  convention,  elected  substantially  in  the  same 
way  as  the  Frankfort  Constituent  of  '49,  assembled  at  Berlin,  February  24, 
1867.  The  allied  governments  submitted  a  draft,  which  the  convention 
altered  at  forty-one  points.  The  governments  accepted  the  changes,  and 
on  April  17,  1867,  the  new  constitution  was  declared  adopted.  It  went 
into  effect  the  next  July  I.  The  Bund  embraced  the  21  states  north  of  the 
Main,  or  22  counting  the  grand-duchy  of  Hesse,  which  held  thereto  an 
ambiguous  relation,  partly  within  and  partly  without,  exactly  as  had  many 
a  land  to  the  old  empire  and  to  the  old  Bund. 

2  So  early  as  1861  v.  Sybel,  in  pref.  to  Die  deutsche  Nation  u.  d.  Kai- 
serreich,  had  declared :  '  As  certainly  as  rivers  run  to  the  sea,  there  will  be 
formed  in  Germany,  by  the  side  of  Austria,  a  limited  federation  under  the 
direction  of  Prussia.  To  secure  it  recourse  will  be  had  to  all  the  means  of 
persuasion  and  diplomacy,  but  to  war  in  case  of  resistance.' 


PRUSSIA    AND   THE    NEW    EMPIRE  435 


§  18     From  Bund  to  Empire 

Miiller,  §  26.    FriedZander,  in  Deutsche  Rundschau,  vol.  iii.    Bryce,  430  sqq.    Viron, 
as  at  §  17.    Martin,  Verfassung  u.  Grundgesetze  d.  deuischen  Reichs. 

To  the  surprise  of  many,  yet  wisely,  Bavaria,  Wiirttem- 
berg,  Baden  and  Hesse1  were  not  forced  into  the  new 
confederation.  Their  membership  at  first  could  have 
been  only  involuntary,  and  would  have  rendered  strong 
centralization  impossible.  Article  79  of  the  constitu- 
tion opened  to  them  a  door,  but  entrance  depended  upon 
their  own  option.  In  each  a  strong  national-liberal  party 
wished  union  with  the  North,  but  was  opposed  by  the 
ultra-liberals  and  the  clericals,  the  last  especially  in 
Bavaria,  a  catholic  land,  dreading  Prussia  religiously,2 
while  the  democrats  throughout  the  South  declaimed 
against  Prussia's  military  government  and  greed  of  terri- 
tory, and  made  the  most  of  every  sign  that  her  liberal 
professions  were  hypocritical.  Strict  particularists  were 
few,  most  opponents  of  union  advocating  a  South  Ger- 
man Bund,  some  with,  some  without  a  French  protector- 
ate, the  gross-deutsdie  or  Austrian  party  seeing  as  yet 
no  hope  on  account  of  the  Peace  of  Prag.3  The  treaties  4 
of  offence  and  defence  with  the  Bund,  by  which  in  case 
of  war  the  troops  of  each  southern  state  were  to  be 
placed  under  command  of  the  king  of  Prussia,  Bavaria 
and  Wiirttemberg  assented  to  only  under  pressure.  The 
new  Zollverein,5  and  the  reorganization  of  the  southern 
armies  on  the  Prussian  model  had  both  to  be  carried 
through  against  like  pronounced  hostility.  Napoleon's 
excuseless  declaration  of  war  in  1870  was  thus  a  God- 
send for  German  unity,  revealing  that  monarch's  selfish- 


436  PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

ness  both  directly  and  by  occasioning  the  publication 
of  his  designs  of  German  conquest  in  1866.  South 
Germany  entered  the  war  no  less  heartily  than  the 
Bund,6  and  their  common  sufferings  and  glory  therein 
made  a  more  perfect  union  presently  a  matter  of  course. 
Baden  and  Hesse,  the  most  inclined  thereto  all  along 
joined  the  Bund  November  15,  1870,  Bavaria  the  23d, 
Wiirttemberg  the  25th.  The  name  'Bund'  was  changed 
to  'Reich'  and  'President'  to  'Kaiser,'  December  10, 
and  proclamation  made  accordingly  January  18,  1871. 
The  constitution  of  the  Bund,  revised  in  terminology  to 
suit  these  changes,  became  the-  constitution  7  of  the  new 
German  Empire. 

1  I.e.,  the  portion  of  Germany  proper  south  of  the  Main. 

2  England  and  America  little  knew  to  what  an  extent  the  wars  of  1866 
and  1870  involved  religious  interests.  Rome  and  the  Jesuits  thought  of 
Sadowa  as  a  triumph  of  heretics.  'The  world  is  coming  to  an  end,'  ex- 
claimed cardinal  Antonelli  on  hearing  the  news.  Catholic  opposition  in 
south  Germany  did  more  than  anything  else  to  retard  German  union. 

3  Which  excluded  Austria  from  all  participation  in  the  reconstruction 
of  Germany  [§  16]. 

4  These  were  kept  secret  for  the  time,  and  Louis  Napoleon  rested  in 
the  pleasant  expectation  of  another  Rhein-Bund  so  soon  as  he  might  please 
to  go  to  war  with  Prussia. 

6  The  legislature  of  this  was  to  consist  of  the  north  German  Bundes- 
rath,  enlarged  pro  hoc  by  delegates  from  the  southern  states.  This  was  a 
fine  schema  for  the  Reichstag  soon  to  be,  accustoming  public  men  from  the 
south  to  visit  Berlin  and  do  state  business  with  northerners.  The  revived 
Zollverein  did  little  work  however,  as  the  feudalists  and  Fortschrittler  who 
legislated  for  it  on  the  Bund's  behalf  nearly  always  sided  with  the  southern 
obstructionists  against  the  national-liberals. 

6  '  Seldom  had  such  a  national  rising  been  seen  —  so  swift,  so  universal, 
so  enthusiastic,  sweeping  away  in  a  moment  the  heart-burnings  of  liberals 
and  feudals  in  Prussia,  the  jealousies  of  north  and  south  Germans,  of  prot- 
estants  and  catholics.  Every  citizen,  every  soldier,  felt  that  this  struggle 
was  a  struggle  for  the  greatness  and  freedom  of  the  nation;  and  the  un« 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE  437 

broken  career  of  victory  which  carried  the  German  arms  over  the  east  and 
centre  of  France,  and  placed  them  at  last  triumphant  in  the  capital  of  their 
foes,  proved,  in  the  truest  sense,  what  strength  there  is  in  a  righteous 
cause.'  —  Bryce. 

7  It  thus  appears  that  187 1  was  really  one  of  the  least  significant  years 
in  this  long  evolution.  The  war  of  1866  and  Napoleon's  declaration  of 
war  in  '70  were  the  crucial  turning-points. 


§  19    De  Bello  Gallico 

Gramont,  France  et  Prusse  avant  la  guerre.  Junck,  Deutsch.-franz.  fCrieg,  1870-'!. 
Treitschke,  Zehn  Jahre  d.  K'dmpfe.  Veron,  as  at  §  17.  Riisttrw,  The  W.  for  the 
Rhine  Frontier,  3  v.     Benedetti,  Ma  Mission  en  Prusse. 

Napoleon's  audacity  at  home  and  showy  deeds  in  the 
Crimean  and  Italian  wars  made  him  at  once  the  hero, 
arbiter  and  dread  of  Europe.  He  burned  to  equal  his 
uncle,  avenge  Waterloo  and  extend  France  permanently 
to  the  Rhine.  Blind  to  the  rise  of  Prussia  in  military 
organization  and  resources,  he  did  not  hesitate  in  '59  to 
weaken !  Austria,  her  natural  foe,  or  to  aid  in  erecting 
the  kingdom  of  Italy,  her  natural  ally.  He  gladly  con- 
sented to  Prussia's  plans  in  '66,  expecting  a  war  which 
would  cripple  both  contestants  and  open  way  for  the 
triumph  of  his  ambitions.  Piqued  at  failure  to  secure 
Bismarck's  promise  of  reward  for  his  abstention,  he  be- 
gan courting  Austria  and  planning  Prussia's  defeat,  and 
the  latter's  overwhelming  victory,  revealing  that  France 
had  a  dangerous  rival  in  arms,  he  a  master  at  diplomacy, 
filled  him  with  rage  and  alarm.  Fight  at  once2  he  dared 
not,  so  unprepared  had  the  Mexican  campaign  left  France, 
but  he  was  convinced  that  naught  but  a  victorious  war 
would  restore  his  waning  prestige.  Jesuits,  all  Roman 
catholics,3  ambitious  military  men  prodded  him  to  arms, 
as  did  his  decreasing  popularity  in  France,  and  the  ecu- 


438  PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

menical  disgrace  of  his  procedure  in  Mexico.  In  keep- 
ing with  these  selfish  motives  for  the  war  of  1870,  was 
the  manner  of  provoking  it,  purely  wanton,4  alienating 
the  world's  sympathy,  and  exhibiting  Prussia  as  an  in- 
jured party  redressing  its  wrong.  The  result,  so  far  as 
related  to  the  emperor,5  all  felt  to  be  poetic  justice. 
First  blood  drawn  August  2,  the  18th  sees  Bazaine 
locked  in  Metz  with  175,000  men,  September  2,  Napo- 
leon himself  a  prisoner  with  110,000  more.  The  Second 
Republic  is  proclaimed  September  4,  and  Paris  surren- 
ders January  28,  1871,  more  than  half  France  meantime 
scoured  by  German  armies.  Instead  of  carrying  France 
to  the  Rhine  the  war  made  Elsass  and  Lothringen  Ger- 
man again,6  and  compelled  the  offending  nation  to  pay 
within  three  years  a  IT  indemnity  of  five  milliards  of 
francs. 

1  Never  did  the  head  of  a  state  commit  more  blunders  in  the  same 
length  of  time.  Certainly  none  in  modern  times  has  displayed  more 
perfidy.  From  his  point  of  view  he  should  have  averted  rather  than 
helped  Austria's  misfortune  in  '59,  allied  himself  with  that  power  in  '66, 
and  avoided  meddling  in  Mexican  affairs  altogether.  He  was  Bismarck's 
dupe  from  beginning  to  end.  It  seems  indeed  to  have  been  his  fussy  ob- 
trusion which  led  in  '66  to  the  fixing  of  the  Main  as  southern  boundary  to 
the  Bund,  but  this  proved  a  blessing  to  Prussia  and  Germany,  not  to 
France,  his  hope  still  to  keep  Germany  divided  and  subject  to  French 
arbitrament  failing  utterly.  In  '51  as  well  as  in  '59  Napoleon  had  invited 
Prussia  to  a  French  alliance,  with  gracious  permission,  on  compliance,  to 
annex  and  reorganize  in  Germany  as  she  might  list.     Cf.  §  16,  n.  4. 

2  Immediately  after  Sadowa,  in  Aug.,  '66,  Napoleon  demanded  Prus- 
sia's consent  to  his  acquisition  of  Rhenish  Bavaria  and  Hesse,  including  the 
fortress  of  Mainz,  and  the  renunciation  by  Prussia  of  right  to  garrison  the 
fortress  of  Luxemburg,  threatening  war  in  case  of  refusal.  Benedetti  having 
presented  these  demands,  Bismarck  exclaimed :  '  Good :  then  it  is  war.' 
The  emperor  had  to  recede,  trumping  up  the  excuse  that  the  threat  of  war 
had  been  wrung  from  him  when  ill.     Miiller,  357. 


PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW   EMPIRE  439 

8  Foremost  of  all,  the  empress  Eugenie,  a  bigoted  devotee,  wholly  sub- 
servient to  the  Jesuits.  '  This  is  my  war,'  she  said,  the  fatal  evening  when 
the  declaration  was  resolved  upon,  'with  God's  help  we  will  subdue  the 
protestant  Prussians.' 

4  Queen  Isabella  having  abdicated,  June  25,  1870,  the  Spanish  ministry 
proposed  prince  Leopold  of  Hohenzollern  for  king  of  Spain.  Although 
Leopold  was  a  distant  relative  of  king  William,  the  latter  had  had  noth- 
ing to  do  with  the  choice.  Yet  Napoleon  demanded  that  he  should  forbid 
Leopold's  acceptance.  William  refused.  As,  however,  his  relative  de- 
clined the  throne  without  the  demanded  intervention  from  Berlin,  the 
whole  world  supposed  the  question  settled,  when,  to  the  amazement  of  all, 
Napoleon  required  William  to  agree  that  no  Hohenzollern  should  ever 
with  his  consent  acquire  the  Spanish  crown.  Refusal  was  a  foregone  con- 
clusion, and  when  war  was  declared  no  efforts  that  Napoleon  could  make 
could  conceal  the  utter  frivolousness  and  shabbiness  of  the  pretext. 

5  After  the  fall  of  the  empire,  as  its  opponents  had  not  wished  the  war, 
they  appealed  to  the  Prussians  for  its  cessation.  Bismarck's  reply  was 
that  it  had  been  declared  with  the  approval  of  a  unanimous  French  senate 
and  by  a  vote  of  245  against  10  in  the  chamber,  that  hence  nation  and  not 
emperor  alone  must  bear  the  consequences.  This  was  good  international 
law  but  in  fact  unjust.  Majority  votes  under  the  empire  were  often  very 
far  from  expressing  the  real  national  will. 

6  v.  Sybel,  Deutschland's  Rechte  auf  Elsass-Lolkringen,  in  Kl.  hist. 
Schriften,  vol.  iii.  On  the  earlier  relation  of  these  territories  to  Germany, 
Weber,  II,  78  sqq.,  ante,  Chaps.  IX,  §  19,  n.  7,  X,  §  3,  n.  1. 


§  20    New  Germany  and  New  Europe 

Karl  Blind,  '  Radical  and  Revolutionary  Parties  in  Europe,'  Contemp.  Rev.,  Oct.,  1882. 
Muller,  Gesch.  d.  Politik,  i87i-'8i.  Pey,  Allemagne  d' aujourd' hui.  Tuttle, 
German  Political  Leaders.  Hillebrand,  La  Prusse  Contetnporaine.  Baring-Gould, 
as  at  §  12. 

The  rise  of  Prussia  will  prove  to  have  been  one  of  the 
most  momentous  changes  in  the  entire  history  of  civili- 
zation. It  placed  the  headship  of  Continental  Europe 
for  the  first  time  in  protestant  and  purely  Teutonic 
hands,  reducing  Austria,  Rome's  stoutest  ally,  to  the 
second   rank   of  governments.      The   change   brought 


440  PRUSSIA    AND    THE    NEW    EMPIRE 

about  in  France  rendered  that  state  unwilling  as  well 
as  unable  longer  to  champion  the  church,  while  greatly 
strengthening  it  as  a  liberal  force  by  displaying  the 
weakness  of  imperialism  and  at  once  bracing  and  sober- 
ing republican  purposes.  Advanced  church  laws  were 
passed  in  Switzerland,  free  thought  took  courage  even 
in  Austria.  Italian  unity  was  completed,  Victor  Eman- 
uel defying  papal  anathemas  and  fearlessly  moving  on 
Rome  so  soon  as  its  French  guards  were  needed  at  home. 
More  remarkable  are  and  are  to  be  the  results  in  Ger- 
many itself,  where  already  begin  to  appear  those  subtle 
but  choice  developments  of  civilization  which  only  grand 
statehood  can  call  forth.  With  all  the  helpful  possibilities 
of  the  old  empire  the  njew  joins  the  eminent  advantages 
of  being  (i)  purely  German,  (2)  powerfully  centralized, 
and  (3)  solely  political,  free  from  all  ecclesiastical  alliance. 
Thrilled  with  great  life  Germany  proceeds  to  outgrow 
the  Fatherland,  fretting  Ocean  with  her  merchantmen, 
planting  colonies  beyond.  Germany  with  her  unmatched 
prestige,  Germany  so  learned  and  strong,  so  peaceable  if 
permitted  to  be,  so  terrible  if  provoked,  Germany  pos- 
sessing resources  so  vast  and  varied,  developed  and 
undeveloped,  wheels  into  column  with  Great  Britain 
and  the  United  States  to  forward  the  irresistible  march 
of  Teutonic  civilization  round  the  globe. 


INDEX  TO  BIBLIOGRAPHIES 


Adam,  xii. 
Adams,  98,  302,  346. 
AH  Malmi,  216. 
Alison,  346,  394. 
Allen,  62. 
Alzog,  134. 
Arnold,  xii,  62,  216. 
Arnold  [W.] ,  98. 
Atkinson,  xii. 
Augustine,  xii, 

Baird,  302. 

Baldwin,  24. 

Bancroft  [Jane  M.],  174. 

Barruel,  346. 

Bastard  d'Estang,  174. 

Baumgarten,  346. 

Bernheim,  xii. 

Bibliography,  Select,  xii,  24,  62,  98, 134, 

174,  216,  256,302,  346,  394. 
Biedermann,  346. 
Birch,  24. 
Bisset,  xii. 
Blanc,  346. 
Blanqui,  174. 
Bossuet,  xii. 

Bosworth-Smith,  62,  216. 
Braumann,  174. 
Bray,  24. 

Britannica,  Encyc,  174,  216,  256,  394. 
Brugsch,  24. 
Bryce,  98,  134,  394. 
Buckle,  xii. 
Bulwer,  256. 
Bunsen,  xii. 
Burckhardt,  62,  256. 


Burke,  346. 
Busch,  394. 

Carlyle,  346. 

Cheruel,  302. 

Choiseul-Daillecourt,  216. 

Church,  98. 

Clark,  174. 

G6mte,  xii. 

losel,  394. 

Gjpx,  62,  216. 

Creighton,  134,  256. 

Croker,  346. 

Crowe,  256. 

Crojve  and  Cavalcaselle,  256. 

Curteis,  62. 

Currius,  62. 

Cutts,  62. 

Dahn,  98. 
Dale,  62. 

Davenport-Adams,  24. 
De  Broglie,  62. 
De  Coulanges,  98,  174. 
De  Felice,  302. 
De  Lanoye,  24. 
Deloche,  174. 
De  Mortillet,  24. 
De  Nadaillac,  24. 
Desmaze,  174. 
De  Tocqueville,  346. 
Dickens,  346. 
Digby,  174. 
Dollinger,  134. 
Dozy,  216. 
Draper,  xii,  216. 


442 


INDEX    TO    BIBLIOGRAPHIES 


Droysen,  xii,  302,  394. 

Ducoudray,  346. 

Diimichen,  24. 

Diimmler,  134. 

Duncker,  24,  62. 

Duruy,  62,  98, 134,  174,  216,  394. 

Ebers,  24. 
Eberty,  394. 
Eliot  [Geo.],  256. 

Fairbairn,  216. 

Fauriel,  98. 

Felton,  62. 

Finlay,  216. 

Fisher,  24,  256. 

Fix,  394- 

Flach,  174. 

Flathe,  394. 

Flint,  xii. 

Floto,  xii. 

Forster,  394. 

Fontane,  24. 

Freeman,  xii,  62, 134,  216. 

Freitag,  256,  302. 

Froude,  xii,  256. 

Funk,  216. 

Fyffe,  346,  394. 

Gardiner,  302,  346. 

Garnet,  302. 

Geiger,  256. 

Gfrorer,  134,  302. 

Gibbon,  62,  98, 134,  216. 

Giesebrecht,  98,  134,  216. 

Gieseler,  62,  256. 

Gilman,  216. 

Gindely,  302. 

Giraud,  174. 

Gregorovius,  62,  134. 

Gregory  of  Tours,  98. 

Grimm,  256. 

Grote,  24,  62. 

Griin,  256. 

Guerard,  174. 

Guizot,  98,  134,  174,  216,  256,  346. 

Gwatkin,  62. 


Haag,  302. 

Hausser,  256,  302,  346,  394. 

Hallam,  134, 174,  256. 

Hallwich,  302. 

Harrison,  346. 

Harte,  302. 

Hase,  62,  256. 

Hatch,  62. 

Heeren,  24,  216,  302. 

Hefele,  62. 

Hegel,  xii. 

Heinel,  394. 

Henne,  256. 

Henne-am-Rhyn,  216. 

Herder,  xii. 

Hertzberg,  62,  98,  216. 

Heyd,  216. 

Hodgkin,  98. 

Honegger,  24. 

Hopf,  216. 

Hughes,  216. 

Humboldt  [W.],  xii. 

Hurter,  302. 

Isaacsohn,  394. 

Janet,  346. 
Janssen,  256,  302. 
Joly,  24. 

Kaufmann,  98. 
Keary,  24. 
Kingsley,  xii,  98. 
Kitchin,  174,  302,  346. 
Klopp,  302. 
Klupfel,  394. 
Knaacke,  256. 
Kostlin,  256. 
Kremer,  216. 
Kugler,  216. 
Kuhn,  256. 
Kurtz,  62. 

La  Jonquiere,  216. 
Lalor,  Cyclopaedia,  216. 
Lamartine,  346. 
Lancizolle,  394. 
Lange,  62. 


INDEX    TO    BIBLIOGRAPHIES 


443 


Laurent,  xii,  346. 

Lavisse,  394. 

Lea,  62,  134. 

Lecky,  62,  98,  346. 

Lehmann,  24. 

Lehuerou,  134,  174. 

Lenormant,  24. 

Lenormant  and  Chevalier,  24. 

Leo,  98,  134. 

Lewis,  98,  134,  394. 

Lewis  [Sir  G.  C.] ,  xii. 

Liddell,  62. 

Lodge,  394. 

Lohmeyer,  394. 

Lorenz,  xii. 

Lotze,  xii,  62. 

Lubbock,  24. 

Luchaire,  174. 

Madvig,  62. 

Maine,  24,  174. 

Maitland,  134,  174. 

Mariette,  24. 

Marquardt-Mommsen,  62. 

Martin,  98,  256,  302,  346. 

Maspero,  24. 

Masson,  174,  302. 

Maurenbrecher,  xii. 

Maurer,  98. 

Mebold,  302. 

Menard,  24. 

Merivale,  62. 

Metternich,  394. 

Michaud,  216. 

Michelet,  xii,  134,  174,  216,  256,  302, 

346. 
Mignet,  346. 
Mill,  xii,  346. 

Milman,  62,  98,  134,  174,  216,  256. 
Mills,  174,  216. 
Mitford,  62. 
Mommsen,  24,  62,  98. 
Montesquieu,  xii,  98,  174. 
Morison,  xii. 
Morris,  346. 
Mosheim,  62. 
Motley,  302. 
Muller,  216,  394. 


Miintz,  256. 
Muir,  216. 
Myers,  24. 

Naudet,  174. 
Neale,  216. 
Neander,  62. 
Niebuhr,  24,  62,  346. 
Nitzsch,  62,  98,  134. 
Noorden,  346. 
Northcote,  62,  256. 

Odysse-Barot,  xii. 
Oldenberg,  24. 
Oncken,  346. 
Osborn,  24. 
Ozanam,  98. 

Packard,  24. 
Pardessus,  174. 
Pater,  256. 
Perkins,  302. 
Perreciot,  174. 
Perrot  and  Chipiez,  24. 
Pertz,  394. 
Peschel,  24. 
Peter,  62. 
Pierson,  394. 
Ploetz,  24. 
Poole,  216. 
Poschinger,  394. 
Prevost-Paradol,  xii. 
Pressens6,  62. 
Prutz,  134,  174,  216. 
Putter,  302. 

Ranke,  xii,  24,  62,  98,  134,  216,  256, 

3°2.  394- 
Raumer,  134,  216,  302,  346. 
Rawlinson,  24. 
Reade,  256. 
Reimann,  394. 
Remington,  134. 
Reuter,  256. 
Rhomberg.  xii. 
Robertson,  256. 
Robson,  302. 
Rocholl,  xii. 
Ronard,  256. 


444 


INDEX    TO    BIBLIOGRAPHIES 


Ross,  98. 
Roth,  174. 
Rothe,  62. 
Ruge,  394. 

Sartorius,  98. 

Sayce,  24. 

Schaff,  62,  256. 

Schiller,  62,  302. 

Schilling,  256. 

Schlegel,  xii. 

Schlosser,  346. 

Schulte,  134. 

Schulze,  256. 

Scott  [Sir  W.] ,  216. 

Secretan,  174. 

Seebohm,  256. 

Seeley,  346,  394. 

Seignobos,  174. 

Shedd,  xii. 

Sheppard,  98,  134. 

Sismondi,  xii,  62,  134,  174,  256. 

Smith  [G.] ,  24. 

Smith  [Goldwin] ,  xii. 

Smith  [P.],  24,  62,  134. 

Smyth,  98,  302,  346. 

Sohm,  98,  174. 

Spencer,  xii. 

Sprenger,  216. 

Stein,  256. 

Stenzel,  394. 

Stephen,  216. 

Stephens,  346. 

Sterling-Maxwell,  302. 

Stevens,  302. 

Stille,  98,  134,  174. 

Stobart,  216. 

Stubbs,  xii,  98,  174. 

Students'  France,  174,  302,  346. 

Sybel,  98,  216,  346. 

Symonds,  256,  302. 


Tacitus,  98. 
Taine,  346. 
Taylor,  256. 
Thierry  [Am.] ,  62,  98. 
Thiers,  346. 
Thirlwall,  62. 
Thornton,  xii. 
Tiraboschi,  256. 
Tolstoi,  346. 
Topelius,  302. 
Treitschke,  346,  394. 
Trench,  134. 
Tuttle,  394. 
Tylor,  24. 

Utterodt,  302. 

Van  Laun,  346. 
Vaux,  24. 
Vico,  xii,  256. 
Villemain,  134. 
Villermont,  302. 
Villers,  256,  302. 
Voigt,  256. 
Voltaire,  xii. 

Waitz,  98,  134,  174. 
Wattenbach,  134. 
Weber,  394. 
Weil,  216. 
Weir,  346,  394. 
Wietersheim,  98. 
Wilken,  216. 
Wilkinson,  24. 
Willems,  62. 
Williams,  24. 

Zeller,  62. 
Ziller,  256. 
Zwiedeneck-Siidenhorst,  302. 


INDEX  TO  TEXT  AND  NOTES 


Abelard,  262. 

Acre,  240,  244. 

Adrian  IV,  167. 

Albert  the  Bear,  396. 

Albertus  Magnus,  262. 

Albigenses,  205,  246,  284,  287. 

Alcuin,  143,  259. 

Alexander  the  Great,  72. 

Alexander  III,  167;  VI,  284. 

Alexius,  237. 

Angelo,  274,  276,  277. 

Anthropology,  25. 

Antioch  taken  by  Turks,  233  ;   retaken 

by  crusaders,  237. 
Antiquity,  intelligence  of,  46;  art,  50; 

industrial  condition,  52 ;  morality,  56 ; 

instructor  of  Greece  and  Rome,  57. 
Aquinas,  254. 
Arabs,  217  ;  their  civilization,  229 ;  their 

schools  in  Spain,  261.     (See  also  Is- 
lam and  Mohammed.) 
Aragon,  246. 
Archduke  Charles,  386. 
Ariosto,  271. 

Aristotle,  67,  259,  262,  284. 
Assembly,  French  Legislative,  372,  374, 

376,  382 ;  National,  367, 368,  369, 380. 
Assurbanipal,  41. 
Assyria,  28,  41,  46,  51,  56,  58. 
Athanasius,  94. 
Attila,  91,  99. 
Augsburg,    confession    of,    293,    296; 

peace  of,  296,  303,  304,  308,  327,  335. 
Augustine,  93. 
Augustus,  78. 
Austria  becomes  a  duchy,  165 ;  extent 


of  power,  291 ;  in  the  Thirty  Years' 
War,  316,  319,  320,  335,  341 ;  in  the 
French  Revolution,  383,  386;  war 
with  Frederic  the  Great,  405 ;  Prus- 
sia's subjection  to,  409,  414,  416,  419, 
421,  425  ;   Prussia's  ascendancy,  427, 

43»- 
Avars,  137,  146,  235. 
Averroes,  269,  284. 

Babylon,  31,  33,  41,  47,  58. 
Bacon,  Roger,  262,  279. 
Bailly,  368,  372. 
Base!,  peace  of,  383,  425. 
Bastille,  368. 

Bavaria,  165, 168,325,  336,  391,417,436. 
Bazaine,  438. 
Belgium,  419. 
Bembo,  269. 
Berlin  Decree,  388. 
Bernard  of  Weimar,  333. 
Bismarck,  400,  427,  431,  437. 
Blucher,  389,  412. 
Boccaccio,  264. 

Bohemia,  charter  of,  317 ;  revolts  against 
Ferdinand  II,  318;   sues  for  peace, 

323- 
Boiardo,  271. 
Bologna,  78,  254,  262. 
Boniface,  136,  141. 
Brandenburg,  165  ;  elector  of,  315 ;  in 

Thirty  Years'  War,  315, 325, 330, 333 ; 

its  rise  to  power,  396,  398 ;  the  great 

elector,  400. 
Braunau,  317,  319. 
Breitenfeld,  battle  of,  332. 


446 


INDEX    TO    TEXT   AND    NOTES 


Brunelleschi,  275. 

Buddhism,  43,  54,  56. 

Bund,  see  Germanic  Confederation. 

Burgundy,  126,  150,  172,  291. 

Cachet,  Lettres  de,  363. 

Calvin,  293,  299. 

Cambray,  league  of,  291. 

Cambyses,  39. 

Campo  Formio,  peace  of,  384. 

Canossa,  161,  163. 

Capet,  Hugh,  190. 

Carolingians,  rise  of  the,  128 ;  alliance 
with  the  popes,  132. 

Castile,  246. 

Chalcedon,  council  of,  91. 

Chaldeans,  31,  41,  46,  51. 

Charles  of  Anjou,  172,  244. 

Charles  II,  the  Bald,  176;  VII  of 
France,  212;  VIII,  281,  291. 

Charles  IV,  emp.  H.  R.  E.,  148. 

Charles  V  of  Germany,  291,  296,  306. 

China,  29,  31,  47. 

Chlodovech,  99,  126,  179,  182. 

Christian  IV  of  Denmark,  326;  IX,  430. 

Christianity,  its  rise,  85  ;  influence,  87. 

Church,  early  organization,  89;  theo- 
logical controversy,  93 ;  influence  of, 
95 ;  attitude  toward  Rome  in  its  de- 
cline, 102;  its  relation  to  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire,  154;  its  relation  to 
feudalism,  159;  condition  in  fifteenth 
century,  283. 

Cimabue,  277. 

Cimbri,  112. 

Communes,  rise  and  power  in  Italy, 
198;  in  France,  201;  influence  of 
crusades  upon,  252. 

Concordat  of  Worms,  163. 

Condillac,  361. 

Confederation  of  the  Rhine,  386,  414, 

425- 
Conrad  III,  165,  240;  IV,  171. 
Conradin,  172. 
Constance,  council  of,  283,  287 ;  treaty 

of,  167. 
Constantine,  85. 
Constantinople,  its   resistance  to  the 


Saracens,  227;  crusaders  arrive  at, 
237 ;  conquest  by  Palaeologus,  242. 

Convention,  French  National,  373,  377, 
381. 

Corpernicus,  279. 

Cordeliers,  372. 

Correggio,  277. 

Couthon,  377. 

Crusades,  occasion  and  meaning,  235 ; 
first  crusade,  237;  second  and  third, 
240;  fourth,  241;  remaining  eastern 
crusades,  243 ;  western  crusades,  245  ; 
results,  248  seq. 

Cyrus,  41. 

Dagobert,  127. 

Dante,  154,  264. 

Danton,  372,  375, 377. 

Darius  Hystaspes,  45. 

Da  Vinci,  274,  277. 

Denmark,  150,  176;  in  the  Thirty 
Years'  War,  321,  326;  Schleswig- 
Holstein  question,  422, 430. 

Diderot,  361. 

Diocletian,  83. 

Directory,  377,  383,  385. 

Dominicans,  287. 

Donauworth,  312,  333. 

Diirer,  281. 

Dumouriez,  377,  381. 

Dorylseum,  battle  of,  237. 

Eastern  empire,  breach  of,  with  the 
West,  129. 

Ecclesiastical  unity  of  Europe,  135. 

Egypt,  27,  31,  33,  35 ;  the  old  kingdom, 
36 ;  the  new,  39 ;  art  in,  51. 

Einhard,  143. 

Elsass-Lothringen,  150,  348,  438. 

Emigrants,  French,  380. 

England,  178  ;  feudalism  in,  199;  King 
John  defeated  by  Philip  Augustus, 
201,  204;  Richard  Coeur  de  Lion, 
240;  Wyclif,  first  English  reformer, 
287 ;  spread  of  the  reformation,  293 ; 
in  the  Thirty  Years'  War,  315,  321, 
327 ;  joins  coalition  against  France, 
383 ;  Wellington  in  Spain,  388. 


INDEX  TO  TEXT  AND  NOTES 


447 


Erasmus,  281. 

Ferdinand  I,  emp.  H.  R.  E.,  291;  II, 
312,   319,   320,   323,    327,    329,    330, 

333- 

Feudalism,  defined,  175;  its  modifica- 
tions, 176;  its  causes,  177;  common 
theory  of  origin,  179;  Roth's  view, 
181;  Waitz's  view,  183;  tenure  of 
land,  184;  society,  i85;  feudalism 
victorious,  188 ;  Capetian  reaction, 
190;  how  far  a  system,  192;  defects 
and  merits,  194;  in  Germany,  196; 
in  Italy,  197 ;  in  England,  199 ;  its 
contest  with  the  commons,  201 ;  with 
royalty,  204  seq. 

Feuillants,  372,  376. 

Florence,  255,  266,  275. 

Florus,  80. 

Fra  Angelico,  277. 

France,  connection  of  the  monarchy 
with  feudalism,  175  seq.;  Hugh  Ca- 
pet, king  of,  190;  increase  of  royal 
power,  204,  207,  210;  monarchy  su- 
preme, 212 ;  in  the  crusades,  237  seq. ; 
reformation  in,  293,  296,  340;  mas- 
sacre of  St.  Bartholomew,  306;  in 
Thirty  Years'  War,  313,  315,  319,  321, 
330;  peace  of  Westphalia,  335;  re- 
sults of  the  war,  340,  342;  French 
Revolution,  347  seq.$  Napoleon,  385 
seq.;  results  of  revolution,  391 ;  Fran- 
co-Prussian War,  437. 

Francis  I  of  France,  213,  291,  296. 

Franciscans,  287. 

Frankfort,  assembly  of,  422,  425. 

Franks,  rise  of  their  kingdom,  126,  128  ; 
defend  Rome  from  Lombards,  132; 
spread  of  missions  among,  135  ;  Karl 
the  Great,  137;  their  relation  to  their 
king,  182,  183;  tenure  of  land,  184; 
decline  of  free  institutions,  188. 

Frederic  the  Wise,  elector  of  Saxony, 
296. 

Frederic  I,  Barbarossa,  167,  240;  II, 
169,  171,  244. 

Frederic  IV,  of  the  Palatinate,  313 ;  V, 
321,  322,  325. 


Frederic  William,  the  Great  Elector, 

400. 
Frederic  I  of  Prussia,  403. 
Frederic  II   (the  Great) ,  352,  400,  405. 
Frederic  III,  404. 
Frederic  William  1,403;  11,409;  III, 

410,  417,  425,  433 ;  IV,  422,  425,  433. 
Fiirsten,  152,  290. 
Fiirsten-Bund,  425. 

Genoa,  253,  267. 

Germany,  the  primitive  Germans,  in ; 
their  culture,  113;  their  constitution, 
115;  their  military  system,  117;  their 
religion,  118;  Holy  Roman  Empire, 
147,  149,330;  feudalism  in,  196;  ref- 
ormation in,  288, 292, 295, 298;  Thirty 
Years'  War,  303  seq. ;  war  of  libera- 
tion, 411;  Holy  Alliance,  391,  420; 
the  new  empire  and  the  new  consti- 
tution, 436. 

Germanic  Confederation,  391,  414,  416, 
420.  424.  425.  428,  430,  433,  435. 

Ghibelline,  see  Guelph. 

Giotto,  274,  277. 

Girondists,  373,  374,  376. 

Gneisenau,  324,  389. 

Godfrey  of  Bouillon,  237. 

Goths,  99,  113,  224. 

Granada,  247. 

Greece,  characteristics  of,  64 ;  intellec- 
tual supremacy,  65  ;  philosophy,  66 ; 
art,  68 ;  political  ideas,  70 ;  spread  of 
its  civilization,  71. 

Gregory  I  (the  Great),  130;  II,  130; 
III,  132;  VII,  see  Hildebrand;  IX, 
169. 

Guelph,  165,  169,  171. 

Gustavus  Adolphus,  309,  319,  327,  330, 
332. 

Hanseatic  cities,  309. 
Hapsburg,  145,  291,  316. 
Hardenberg,  414. 
Hebert,  372,  373,  375, 
Helvetius,  361. 
Henry  the  Proud,  165. 
Henry  the  Lion,  165,  168. 


448 


INDEX  TO  TEXT  AND  NOTES 


Henry  I,  the  Fowler,  146  J  III,  156, 198 ; 

IV,  156,  161,  163;  V,  164;  VI,  169. 
Henry  II  of  France,  296;  111,343;  IV, 

315.  340- 

Hildebrand,  156,  160. 

Hindoos,  31,  33,  42. 

History,  signification,  1 ;  objective,  1 ; 
subjective,  2 ;  civilization  auxiliary  to, 
3 ;  is  it  a  science?  8 ;  objections,  9, 
10,  11 ;  proofs  that  it  is  a  science,  12, 
13 ;  positive  theory,  15 ;  a  philosophy 
of,  15  ;  agnostic  view,  16 ;  not  without 
purpose,  17,  18 ;  divisions  of,  22. 

Historical  method,  4,  5,  6,  7. 

Historical  study,  20,  21. 

Hobbes,  361. 

Hoche,  383. 

Hohenstaufen,  152,  165,  171,  198. 

Hohenzollern,  397,  398. 

Holbein,  281. 

Holland,  reformation  in,  293 ;  war  with 
Louis  XIV,  351 ;  conquest  of,  by  the 
French,  383. 

Holy  Alliance,  391,  420. 

Holy  League,  291. 

Holy  Roman  Empire.  (See  Germany, 
.Italy.) 

Hospitallers,  St.  John,  251. 

Huguenots,  343. 

Hundred  Years'  War,  212. 

Hungary,  176,  291,  317,  321,  322,  431. 

Hus,  287,  288. 

Hutten,  von,  281. 

Hycsos,  37,  39. 

India,  29,  42,  47,  56. 

Innocent  I,  91 ;  III,  169,  241,  246,  284 ; 

IV,  171. 
Inquisition,  246,  284,  287. 
Islam,  its  meaning,  220;  civilization  of, 

229 ;    its    decline,   231.      (See    also 

Arabs  and  Mohammed.) 
Israel,  religion  of,  55. 
Italy,  for  ancient  history,  see  Rome ; 

Attila  in,  91,  99;  Ostrogothic  empire 

in,  99;   invasion  of  German   tribes, 

in;  Alaric  and  Theodoric  in,  130; 

Lombards    in,    130,    132;     Pippin's 


conquest  in,  132;  Karl  the  Great, 
137;  Otho  the  Great,  146;  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire,  147  seq. ;  Frederic 
Barbarossa  and  the  Lombard  cities, 
150, 165, 167 ;  Guelph  and  Ghibdline, 
165  ;  Frederic  II  and  the  Two  Sicilies, 
169 ;  Sicilian  kingdom  after  Frederic 
II,  171;  feudalism  in,  197;  ascend- 
ancy of  Italian  cities,  253;  Renais- 
sance, 257  seq. 

Jacobins,  372, 377. 

James  I  of  England,  321. 

Jerusalem,  its  conquest  by  the  Turks, 
233 ;  taken  by  crusaders,  238 ;  again 
lost,  240;  ceded  to  Frederic  II,  it  is 
finally  held  by  the  Turks,  244. 

Jesuits,  306,  329,  406,  437. 

John  of  England,  defeated  by  Philip 
Augustus,  201,  204. 

Jourdain,  383. 

Jiilich,  315. 

Justinian,  78,  88,  99,  130. 

Karl  the  Great,  his  coronation,  137, 
his  government,  138;  his  relations 
with  the  church,  140;  his  aid  to  cul- 
ture and  letters,  142. 

Klostergrab,  317,  319. 

Knights  Templar,  211,  251. 

Koniggratz,  battle  of,  431. 

Koran,  the,  220. 

La  Fayette,  368,  372. 

Latin  empire  in  the  East,  242. 

Law,  John,  357. 

League  of  Catholic  princes,  313,  315, 

320.  323.  327.  329.  33°- 
Leo  I  (the  Great),  91;    III,  137;    X, 

267,  293. 
Leon,  246. 
Leopold  II,  382. 
Locke,  361. 
Lombards,  in  Italy,  130;    defeated  by 

the  Franks,  132. 
Lothar  I,  126;   II,  127;  III,  165,  167. 
Louis  VI  (the  Fat),  204;  VII,  240,  254; 

IX,  207,  244;  X,  255;  XI,  212;  XII, 


INDEX  TO  TEXT  AND  NOTES 


449 


173 ;  XIII,  321  ;  XIV,  341,  343, 351 ; 
XV,  352;   XVI,  352,  363,  366,  368, 

376,  38°- 
Louis  Napoleon,  435,  437. 
Lucan,  80. 

Liibeck,  peace  of,  327. 
Liitzen,  battle  of,  333. 
Luther,  279,  292,  295,  299. 

Machiavelli,  271. 

Mansfield,  323,  325,  327. 

Marat,  377. 

Marie  Antoinette,  363,  381. 

Marius,  112. 

Martell,  128,  132,  189,  225. 

Massaccio,  277. 

Mathias,  317. 

Maupertius,  361. 

Maximilian  of  Bavaria,  312,  325. 

Maximilian  I  of  Austria,  291;  II,  316. 

Mecca,  217,  219,  220,  221. 

Medici,  267. 

Melancthon,  281,  296,  309. 

Memphis,  36. 

Mena,  35. 

Merovingian  kingdom,  126;  a  genuine 
state,  181,  183. 

Metternich,  391,  414,  416,  419,  421. 

Metz,  438. 

Milan,  291. 

Mirabeau,  367,  380. 

Mohammed,  218;  his  doctrine,  220; 
spread  of  Mohammedanism,  221 ; 
causes  of  this  revolution,  223 ;  Sara- 
cen conquest  of  Spain,  224  ;  Persia 
subdued,  226. 

Mongols,  244. 

Monroe  doctrine,  392. 

Montesquieu,  361. 

Moors,  224,  246. 

Moreau,  383. 

Mountain,  paVty  of  the,  373,  375,  377. 

Musulman,  its  meaning,  220  ;  attacks 
of  the  Musulmans  upon  Constanti- 
nople, 227. 

Nantes,  Edict  of,  341,  343,  351. 
Naples,    Norman    Conquest    of,  150; 


Alexander  III,  suzerain  of,  167;  be* 
comes  virtually  part  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire,  169;  dominion  of 
Charles  of  Anjou,  172,  244 ;  Charles 
VIII  in,  291. 

Napoleon  I,  Italian  campaign,  384; 
his  rise,  385 ;  his  fall,  388;  his  treat- 
ment of  Prussia,  409,  411. 

Napoleon  111,435,437, 

Navarre,  246, 

Necho,  39. 

Necker,  364,  366,  368. 

Nestorius,  93. 

Netherlands,  in  time  of  Louis  XI,  212; 
under  Charles  V  of  Germany,  291 ; 
struggle  with  Philip  II  of  Spain,  306 ; 
in  Thirty  Years'  War,  315,  321,  325, 
327 ;  severance  from  Spain,  335  ;  at- 
tack of  Louis  XIV,  351. 

Nicsea,  94,  237,  242. 

Nineveh,  27. 

Nordlingen,  battle  of,  333. 

Normans,  in  Italy,  150;  papal  alliance 
of,  157 ;  relation  to  feudalism,  175, 
177 ;  in  England,  199 ;  in  the  crusades, 
23S.  237. 

Ostrogoths,  99,  120,  130. 

Otho  I  (the  Great),  146,  147,  150,  190, 

198 ;  IV,  169. 
Oxenstierna,  333,  335. 

Palatinate,  148,  319,  325,  336. 

Palladio,  276. 

Papacy,  its  rise,  90 ;  Leo  the  Great,  91  ; 
Gregory  the  Great  and  the  icono- 
clastic controversy,  130  ;  alliance 
with  the  Franks,  132 ;  extent  of  papal 
sway  in  time  of  Pippin,  135 ;  relation 
to  Karl  the  Great,  137,  140;  Otho 
the  Great,  146;  the  Holy  Roman 
Empire,  147,  154;  Hildebrand,  157; 
Concordat  of  Worms,  163 ;  Guelph 
and  Ghibelline,  165;  Alexander  III, 
167;  Innocent  III,  Gregory  IX,  169; 
papal  ascendancy,  171 ;  Boniface 
VIII,  decline  of  the  papacy,  210; 
the  crusades,  235  seq. ;  renaissance, 


45o 


INDEX  TO  TEXT  AND  NOTES 


267;  condition  in  fifteenth  century, 
283 ;  the  reformation,  288  seq. ;  Cath- 
olic reaction,  rise  of  the  Jesuits,  306. 

Papyrus  "  Prisse,"  31,  46. 

Paris,  peace  of,  391. 

Parliament  of  Paris,  208,  363,  366. 

Passau,  treaty  of,  305. 

Peasants'  War  in  Germany,  293. 

Pelagius,  93. 

Persia,  conquest  of  Egypt  by  Cam- 
byses,  35,  39;  Babylon  taken  by 
Cryus,  41 ;  Darius  Hystaspes,  45 ; 
art  in,  51 ;  Mohammedan  conquest 
of,  221,  226. 

Peter  the  Hermit,  236,  237. 

Petrarch,  264. 

Philip  II  (Augustus),  of  France,  201, 
204,  240;  IV  (the  Fair),  210. 

Philip  III  of  Spain,  320. 

Phoenicians,  alphabet  of,  34,  49 ;  com- 
merce and  colonies  of,  53,  58. 

Pichegru,  383. 

Pippin  III,  king  of  the  Franks,  128  ;  de- 
fends Rome  from  the  Lombards,  132. 

Pisa,  council  of,  283, 287. 

Pi",  383.  384.  386- 

Plato,  67. 

Pliny,  80. 

Poitiers,  battle  of,  225,  227. 

Poland,  150,  176,  320 ;  partition  of,  352, 
409 ;  war  with  Sweden*  401 ;  Czar 
grants  it  a  constitution,  417;  rebel- 
lion and  fall  of  Warsaw,  419. 

Portugal,  in  the  Moorish  wars,  246,  248 ; 
Wellington  in,  388. 

Prag,  peace  of,  320,  333,  431,  435. 

Preussen,  397,  399,  401. 

Prussia,  its  rise,  395  seq.;  Frederic 
the  Great,  405;  subjugated  by  Na- 
poleon, 409;  war  of  liberation,  411; 
Congress  of  Vienna,  413;  policy  of 
Metternich,  416,  419 ;  war  with  Den- 
mark, 422;  influence  of  revolution 
of  1848,  424 ;  ascendancy  of  Austria, 
425;  Bismarck,  427;  war  with  Aus- 
tria, 431 ;  union  of  Germany,  433 ; 
war  with  France,  437. 

Psammeticus,  39. 


Quatre  Bras,  battle  of,  389. 

Ramessou  II  (the  Great),  39. 

Raphael,  272,  274,  277. 

Reformation,  reformers  before  the,  286 ; 
religious  state  of  Germany,  288 ;  po- 
litical dissensions,  290 ;  spread  of  the 
new  doctrines,  292 ;  political  interven- 
tion and  settlement,  295 ;  ecclesiasti- 
cal settlement,  298  ;  Catholic  counter- 
reform,  306. 

Regensburg,  diet  of,  325. 

Religions  of  antiquity,  54,  55. 

Rembrandt,  281. 

Renaissance,  genius  of,  257;  its  ante- 
cedents, 259 ;  its  dawn,  261,  264 ;  re- 
vival of  learning,  266 ;  dark  side  of, 
269 ;  literature,  270 ;  art,  273 ;  archi- 
tecture and  sculpture,  275  ;  painting, 
277 ;  spread  of  the,  in  Europe,  278, 
280 ;  marked  by  new  ideas,  282 ;  con- 
dition of  the  church,  283. 

Restitution,  edict  of,  319,  320,  327,  330, 

333' 

Reuchlin,  281. 

Rhein-Bund,  see  Confederation  of  the 
Rhine. 

Richard  I  (Coeur-de-Lion),  240. 

Richelieu,  321,  327,  330,  335,  341. 

Robert  of  Burgundy,  204. 

Robespierre,  373,  375. 

Roland,  373,  381. 

Rome,  influence  of  the  East  upon,  57, 
63 ;  genius  of,  73 ;  universal  domin- 
ion of,  74;  language  of,  76;  law, 
77 ;  stoicism  of,  79 ;  the  municipium, 
81;  imperial  organization,  83;  in- 
fluence of  Christianity  upon,  85,  87; 
its  decline  gradual,  99 ;  moral  decay 
of,  101 ;  antagonism  of  the  church 
toward,  102 ;  extinction  of  the  military 
spirit,  104 ;  poverty,  io6\  evils  of  the 
land  tenure,  108;  lack  of  unity,  no; 
the  German  invaders,  in  ;  blending 
of  nationalities,  119,  121 ;  results  of 
this  invasion,  123,  125. 

Rousseau,  361. 

Rubens,  281. 


INDEX    TO    TEXT    AND    NOTES 


451 


Rudolph  II,  315,  317. 

Sadowa,  see  Koniggratz. 

St.  Bartholomew,  massacre  of,  306. 

St.  Bernard,  240. 

St.  Francis,  306. 

St.  Just,  377. 

St.  Louis,  see  Louis  IX. 

Salic  law,  note  193. 

Saracens,  invasions  of,  146;  allies  of 
Frederic  II,  167,  169;  in  Spain,  224; 
in  Palestine,  244.  (See  also  Arabs 
and  Mohammed.) 

Sardica,  council  of,  91. 

Sardinia,  war  with  France,  383;  sup- 
ports Prussia  against  Austria,  431. 

Sargon,  41. 

Savonarola,  279,  287. 

Savoy,  320,  341. 

Saxons,  conquest  of,  by  the  Franks, 
129,  137,  139 ;  missions  among,  135 ; 
feudalism  among,  199. 

Saxony,  duchy  of,  148,  152;  revolt 
against  Henry  IV,  156,  165;  under 
Henry  the  Proud  and  Henry  the 
Lion,  165;  division  of,  165,  168;  in 
the  reformation,  296 ;  in  the  Thirty 
Years'  War,  313,  323,  325,  330,  332; 
confederation  of  the  Rhine,  386; 
loses  a  part  of  its  territory  to  Prussia, 
391 ;  constitution  granted,  419 ;  war 
with  Prussia,  431. 

Scharnhorst,  389,  411. 

Schleswig-Holstein,  422,  430. 

Scotland,  missions  in,  135 ;  reformation 
in,  293. 

Seneca,  80. 

Sicily,  150,  172.     (See  also  Naples.) 

Sieyes,  357,  367. 

Sigismund,  397. 

Simon  de  Montfort,  246. 

Siricius,  91. 

Slavery,  in  the  East,  53,  56 ;  attitude  of 
Christianity  toward,  86;  in  Rome, 
106,  108;  among  the  Germans,  114. 

Society  of  Jesus,  306.     (See  Jesuits.) 

Spain,  Visigoths  in,  99;  relation  of,  to 
the  empire,  150;   feudalism  in,  175, 


177;  conquered  by  the  Arabs,  221, 
224;  Arabian  culture  in,  229,  248, 
261 ;  the  Moorish  invasion,  246 ;  con- 
quest of  Granada,  247 ;  under  Charles 
V,  291 ;  war  with  the  Netherlands, 
306;  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War, 
313  seq. ;  struggle  with  Napoleon, 
388. 

States-General,  366  seq. 

Stein,  386,  389,  410,  411. 

Stoicism,  66,  79,  86,  87,  102. 

Suger,  204. 

Sweden,  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War, 
Gustavus  Adolphus,  330  seq. ;  war 
with  Poland,  401. 

Switzerland,  reformation  in,  293 ;  sepa- 
ration from  the  empire,  335. 

Tacitus,  80. 

Talmud,  219. 

Tartars,  244. 

Tasso,  271. 

Tertullian,  103. 

Tetzel,  293. 

Teutonic  knights,  245,  251. 

Thebes,  37,  39. 

Theodosius  II,  78. 

Theophrastus,  229. 

Third  estate,  its  rise  and  power  in 
France,  201. 

Thirty  Years'  War,  303  seq. ;  origin  and 
character  of,  303-317 ;  Bohemia  in, 
318-323;  Palatinate  phase  of,  325; 
Danish  phase  of,  326;  Waldstein, 
329 ;  Gustavus  Adolphus,  330 ;  Swed- 
ish phase  of,  332;  Peace  of  West- 
phalia, 335 ;  results  of,  to  Germany, 
338;  political  influence  of,  upon 
France,  340 ;  religious  effects  of,  342. 

Tilly,  325,  327,  332. 

Tizian,  277. 

Tours,  see  Poitiers. 

Trajan,  217. 

Trent,  council  of,  306. 

Tribur,  diet  of,  161. 

Turgot,  359,  364. 

Turks,  capture  Jerusalem,  233;  Con- 
stantinople falls,  242. 


452 


INDEX    TO    TEXT    AND    NOTES 


Tuscany,  papal  alliance  with,  157 ;  un- 
der Henry  the  Proud,  165;  Alexan- 
der III  suzerain  of,  167;  Innocent 
III,  169;  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War, 
320 ;  relation  to  the  empire,  338 ;  war 
with  France,  383. 

Union  of  protestant  princes,  312,  315, 

323- 
Urban  II,  235. 

Valentinian  III,  91. 

Valmy,  battle  of,  377. 

Vandals,  99,  103,  112,  120. 

Vassy,  massacre  of,  306. 

Vedas,  31. 

Venice,  an  independent  principality, 
150;  in  the  crusades,  241,  242;  pros- 
perity of,  253 ;  renaissance  in,  267 ; 
attacked  by  the  League  of  Cambray, 
291 ;  joins  the  "  Holy  League,"  291 ; 
Vienna  congress  makes  it  subject  to 
Austria,  414 ;  ceded  to  Sardinia,  431. 

Veronese,  Paolo,  277. 

Victor  Emanuel,  440. 


Vienna,  Congress  of,  391,  414,  420. 
Visigoths,  99,  112,  120,  224. 
Voltaire,  361. 

Waldenses,  287. 
Waldstein,  327,  329,  330,  333. 
Wellington,  386,  388. 
Westphalia,  peace  of,  335. 
White  Mountain,  battle  of,  323. 
William  of  Orange,  351. 
William  I  of  Prussia,  428,  433. 
William  II  of  Prussia,  404. 
William,  king  of  Wurttemberg,  420. 
Writing,  ancient  Assyrian,  and  Egyp- 
tian, 49. 
Wyclif,  287. 

Xanten,  treaty  of,  315. 

Yorck,  412. 

Zachary,  132. 
Zeuxis,  68. 

Zollverein,  425,  434,  435. 
Zwingli,293,  299. 


DATE  DUE     |~7  %V-2 

DEC  4   * 

7 

RECO  NOV 

o      1967 

i 

neat 

MAR  22  19( 

3 

MAR  3 

71 

RECD.       FZl 

3  mi 

GAVLORD 

PRINTED  IN  USA. 

000  594  472     3 


